Mr. Adrian Kane:

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I will read selectively from my statement.

Ireland is unique within the European Union in having an entirely free-market approach to the collection of domestic waste. The model is not sustainable. In summary, it is bad for the environment, citizens and workers. The key finding of the 2018 report by the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, The Operation of the Household Waste Collection Market, is that Ireland is now exceptional within the EU in persisting with what the commission refers to as side-by-side competition within market areas. The 2018 report found that 23% of all households, or almost one in four, have no domestic waste collection service.

The report went on to talk about the consolidation of private providers within the market, which is also covered in a more recent report. In 2012, there were 82 operators in the market. That number has reduced to 51. The largest provider is estimated to have 25% of the market share. That provider is owned by Macquarie Asset Management. The Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund is a long-term fund managed by the asset management arm of the Macquarie Group, which is based in Australia. Members might know the name. The Macquarie Group owned Thames Water from 2007 to 2014, over which period it managed to triple the water company's debt.

A 2022 report by the IPA, which Councillor Doolan referred to, picked up on the issue of illegal dumping. The report noted that this factor was absent from the data on all the main comparator cities, namely, Oslo, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Salzburg. It is difficult to accurately assess the level of illegal dumping in Ireland or the public moneys spent on cleaning up illegal dumping as no single State authority appears to have overall responsibility for monitoring such activity. Dublin was the only city in the report in which illegal dumping was an issue. It is SIPTU's contention that there is a causal relationship between the current waste management model, which does not oblige residents to have a domestic waste collection service, and widespread illegal dumping. In the comparator cities, there is 100% coverage among householders. In Dublin, coverage is only 82%.

On affordability, there is no mechanism through the current waste management model to address households' inability to pay for domestic waste collection services. When the domestic waste collection service was operated by local authorities, that was possible. The IPA report found that all householders in the comparator cities are required to pay for waste collection, with those on low incomes supported through social security. It is not possible to operate a progressive approach in Ireland to household inequality and affordability due to the unregulated free market control of the service. It should be noted that the comparator cities' household service charge is similar to the average cost per household in Dublin.

The IPA report was unable to find any statistics relating to traffic congestion or carbon emissions in the comparator cities. There is a congestion problem in Ireland. Due to multiple providers operating within a single municipal area, multiple refuse trucks are required.

I turn now to employment standards in the industry. Approximately 7,000 workers are employed in the domestic waste management industry. SIPTU represents a significant minority of workers in the sector.

All workers in private sector providers are paid less than local authority workers doing equivalent work. Notably the Institute of Public Administration, IPA, report found that "average salary figures are significantly higher in all of the comparator cities" in comparison to Dublin. Pension and sick-pay provision is virtually non-existent for workers in the industry apart from Bord na Móna Recycling. In survey after survey conducted by SIPTU, workers in the industry express concern around health and safety. There is a high turnover of staff across the industry and agency work is also a feature. The vast majority of employers will not recognise trade unions and SIPTU is driven off any attempts it has made to try to organise workers. None of them will recognise their workers' rights to be collectively represented by a trade union. I want to emphasise that point today. Our organising surveys tell us that most workers want to be represented by a trade union but fear the repercussions from their employer.

On the sale of Bord na Móna Recycling-----