Ossian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

We are considering amendments Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive, which are concerned with changing the definition of the circular economy. It is absolutely critical we get this right because the circular economy is mentioned all the way through the Bill so any kind of change that introduces an ambiguity or has a loophole or flaw may weaken other sections. I reviewed the report that came from the committee on the definition of the circular economy and considered it carefully. The definition of "circular economy" in the published Bill was drafted in consultation with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel and with the Attorney General. His view was the phrase that is in the legislation, namely, "an economic model and the policies and practices which give effect to that model" includes all the items referenced in the amendments, including things like the supply chain, distribution, the process of production and so on through the words "policies and practices".

The definition we put in the Bill is based on the most common internationally used and readily understood definition of the circular economy and is combined with references to resource consumption and environmental harm. Those were put in to reflect the recommendations of the committee. My fear is that introducing this will bring in ambiguity and weaken other sections. The view of the Department is that references to "supply chain", "stage of the supply chain", "processes of production" and so on did not meaningfully expand the scope of the definition, which was already broad, but resulted in a more complex and potentially ambiguous wording. To give a simple example of the Department's concern here, does the haulage of materials from point A to point B constitute a stage of the supply chain, a process of distribution or neither? Would the proposed amendments suggest that absent a redesign of such journeys, the circular economy had not been achieved? These are the concerns of those I have spoken to and we need to be very careful about redefining the circular economy. On that basis I am not accepting amendments Nos. 2 to 5, inclusive.