Paul Daly (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish to pursue a little further the line of questioning the Chairman was going along with Mr. Moloney. Based on some of his answers, I am finding it hard to get my head around the situation. We will give Mr. Moloney the benefit of the doubt. The IFFPG's target is 70% and it collected 80%, therefore, 20% is left out there. Mr. Moloney admits that. The IFFPG is paid for collecting, however. That 20% of the plastic is 100% of the problem. That is the plastic that is not accounted for.

The IFFPG is prepared to take State money. Mr. Moloney is running what he calls a not-for-profit organisation, which is State-funded, to alleviate a problem. The solution was designed in the 1990s, which was actually ahead of the curve when it came to environmental issues that are the order of the day today. In fairness, we were ahead of the curve on this one. We set up a system and the IFFPG was formed, which was getting money from the farmer to solve the problem of his or her finished plastic. IFFPG took 100% of the money and is proud today to say it handled 80% of the problem. I do not know how anyone can appear before a State Oireachtas committee and hold his or her hand up and justify that argument. As I said, 20% of a balance is 100% of the plastic that is out there with a potential environmental catastrophe for the country. The only reason that 20% is not creating mayhem within the environment and in every bog hole, ditch and laneway of the country is thanks to the individual sole traders who stepped into fill the void, and Mr. Moloney cannot see why they would not be entitled to a piece of the pie for the service they are providing for the country and the environment.

The IFFPG calls itself not-for-profit yet said it is sitting on thousands of tonnes of plastic. How can it do its sums or know what reserve is it carrying? When it fixes its charge to the farmers this year, the way the global markets are going, how does it know it is not going to cost ten times that to dispose of the plastic if it does not dispose of it there and then? How does the IFFPG come up with the figures?

Its submission highlights with great clarity the fact that IFFPG reduced the prices by 29% and 40% during 2011 to 2013. In the past three years, however, it has increased them by 45% and 66% for collection off a higher base. It is not giving much back to the farmer other than the problem of the disposal of the additional 20% of plastic, which the IFFPG is getting paid to take away. Will Mr. Moloney please tell me how this can be a good system for the Government and explain why we as politicians should not be going back to redress this issue from the roots up? The current system is not working.