Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the discussion of this Bill, which we in the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action reported on in the context of pre-legislative scrutiny of the legislation in June 2021. The report was subsequently published in December 2021. We met many stakeholders who provided evidence from a broad range of perspectives, including representatives of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, VOICE Ireland, the European Environmental Bureau, EEB, and CIRCULÉIRE. The backdrop to this new policy is the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021, which outlines Ireland's transition to net zero and achieving a climate-neutral economy not later than 2050. It also puts on a statutory footing the circular economy strategy, the circular economy programme and the national food waste prevention roadmap, which will focus on reducing food waste by 50% by 2030.

We live in a linear economy, where raw materials are collected, often to the detriment of developing nations, then transformed into products that are used until they are finally discarded as waste. Value is created in this economic system by producing and selling as many products as possible. This leads to the take, make and disposal of consumerist culture in which we all partake. Deputy O'Rourke is correct that this legislation is a backward-facing policy instead of a forward-facing policy. This is how we used to live some 30, 40 and 50 years ago and we must reflect on the values we had in those days, because we might learn a great deal from the many people who still practice that more frugal lifestyle.

Two reports from the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, last year pointed to a worrying trend in the way we are dealing with our waste. The first, released in September 2021, showed that 69% of Ireland's plastic waste is burned instead of being recycled, which is sending additional greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. A second report on waste published by the EPA in December 2021 found that while waste was rising to record levels, recycling rates were falling and Ireland was over-reliant on incineration to tackle our waste. Furthermore, in 2019, almost half of our rubbish was burned, and that was up from just 4% in 2009. The EPA said at the time that systemic change was needed to shift the focus to designing out waste and promoting reuse and recycling.

I am hopeful that with this Bill we will see the shift we need to help us reach our emissions reductions targets as well to help us move towards a more sustainable and fairer economic system. In a circular economy, waste is minimised and products are kept in use for as long as possible through design, repair and reuse. When a product reaches the end of its life, its parts are used repeatedly to create further useful products, hence the circular nature of resources and products. It is to be hoped this Bill will be a turning point that brings us away from a linear economy and towards a circular one. It is intended to put Ireland on a path towards a circular economy by placing the circular economy strategy, the circular economy programme and the national food waste prevention roadmap on a statutory footing. It will also introduce levies and bans on certain single-use items, while using CCTV to deter dumping and littering.

What I wish to focus on concerning this Bill are the changes made since pre-legislative scrutiny by the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action, of which I am a member. I also wish to touch briefly on timelines and targets. Most importantly, though, I wish to spend most of my time discussing how to make this legislation, and other climate action policies, poverty- and disability-proof. This should be a key focus of the Government in respect of legislation and policies of this type. The Bill has marginally improved since the pre-legislative stage, and has incorporated some of the recommendations made by the joint committee. The Minister of State will be discussing this aspect in his closing statement as well.

The improvements made include some definitions, such as the meaning of "circular economy", which identify each stage of the supply chain and the need to minimise the harmful impact each stage has on the environment. Clarifying that the term "recovery activities" does not include incineration is also welcome. Equally, it is welcome that the annual reporting process under the circular economy plan will now be done in tandem with the climate action plan and through a statutory instrument. I also welcome clarification from the Department that the existing list of environmental levies is indicative and that it can be extended to include single-use items such as wet wipes, hotel toiletries, sugar and condiments.

It has been highlighted, however, by the Department that this legislation only deals with food packaging and that other items must be dealt with separately in the Department and in the EU. A significant public awareness campaign will be implemented on foot of the enactment of this Bill, and this is welcome and was another key recommendation of the joint committee. Unfortunately, the Bill has some shortcomings. Many of our recommendations have been deferred for consideration by the circular economy interdepartmental committee, which is to be established after the legislation is enacted. These include measures such as VAT relief for refurbished and repaired items, insurance and liability for those working in the repair and reuse sector, harmonisation of civic amenities sites, with co-location and co-operation, such as with men's sheds, the addressing of the challenges of planning, obsolescence, renewal, wider development of traditional and heritage crafts, skills and practices and measures the construction sector could take to reduce waste.

Regarding the last point, there is a hesitancy from the Department to increase costs on quarries to incentivise the recovery and recycling of construction industry waste, as this could increase construction costs. In addition to those limitations, I also have some concerns about the language used throughout the Bill. The word "may" is used instead of "shall" in many locations in respect of the Minister's powers to impose levies, bans and regulations. The Bill does not specify where funding from the levies will go in respect of the environment fund. I will be seeking to amend this legislation on later Stages to strengthen the language used to ensure it is robust and has the full backing of the law. This was an issue with the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021 when it first came through the House as well. I refer to this sort of looseness of language. It does not bring the clarity and strength required by legislation and I would like to see work done on this aspect.

A key criticism of the heads of the Bill was the lack of any concrete timelines or targets. I must acknowledge that the Bill has improved in this regard. For example, there is now a timeline for the circular economy strategy to be completed within six months of the commencement of the strategy and not less than once every three years thereafter. The Government has indicated that a six-year timeframe is appropriate for the circular economy programme. The joint committee also requested that numerical targets for sectors to move towards the circular economy be included in the final text of the Bill and I am happy to see that was provided for in section 7(6). These targets will now be included in the circular economy strategy, as provided for in legislation.

While these improvements are welcome, many of these proposals are to be etched out in the circular economy strategy itself. This means that much of the target reporting and target ranges will not be contained in primary legislation, which means they will not have the full backing of the law. This could compromise our ability to ensure sectors are held to account and adhere to Government strategy in this regard. Overall, much improvement can be done to make this an integral part of our climate action objectives and to help us to achieve our national and international objectives in this regard. I will submit amendments to that effect when the Bill moves to Committee and Report Stages.

I turn now to the important issue of poverty-proofing this legislation. In recommendation No. 62, the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action suggested that consideration be given to environmental and human rights considerations in the devising of circular economy action plans. I believe this applies to the international and domestic context. Internationally, the success of the circular economy in developing countries will be critical to global efforts to ensure sustainable growth and the meeting of our collective climate action goals. Human rights, economic inclusion and social equity must all play a central role in circular initiatives at home and abroad.

Domestically, we must ensure the rights of those on low or fixed incomes to participate fully in economic life are protected, enhanced and enforced in a new circular economy model. Hence poverty- and disability-proofing should be an integral pillar in the development of a circular economy. What is being proposed here, if implemented, would bring positive change for our environment and help us to reach our climate action goals. We must, though, ensure this new model does not negatively impact those on low or fixed incomes or on those with disabilities. As we transition to a zero-carbon economy, we must ensure we leave no one behind and that the transition is a fair and just one. What NGOs have persistently advocated for when we make this transition to a zero-carbon economy is that people on low incomes must be able to afford their minimum energy needs. In the context of a circular economy, we must also ensure the same is applied to food and essential goods and services. That is why I call for this Bill and the circular economy strategy to be poverty- and disability-proofed.

7 o’clock

What does this mean, exactly? Poverty-proofing is the process by which Departments, local authorities and State agencies assess policies and programmes at design and review stages on the likely impact they will have or have had on poverty or inequalities likely to lead to poverty with a view to poverty reduction. In the context of rising energy costs and inflation, we must be cognisant of the real daily struggles of people we are dealing with. I, and I am sure every Member in this Dáil, have been contacted by people who are really struggling now with the cost of living, including fuel. These are costs that people could have managed last year or the year before, but with both global and domestic issues, they are finding it very difficult now.

I had one constituent who contacted me who is a cancer patient who had to give up work, so he is now on a disability payment. He received a large electricity bill, and because he paid that bill, he did not have enough money for food. This many also has type 1 diabetes and he ended up in hospital after becoming hyperglycaemic as a result of unstable blood sugar. That is the type of case many people are experiencing. That constituent contacted my office and it is the reality for people that they are unable to pay their heating bills and are resorting to eating less or cheaper and less nutritious food. Children are bearing the brunt of this upheaval, and with inflation continuing to rise, so will poverty rates. Poverty-proofing and disability-proofing Government policies will become more important than ever as a result.

This can be done in a number of ways. In section 7(5), there is a list of strategies and national plans to which the circular economy strategy must have regard. However, there is no reference to poverty reduction strategies, including the forthcoming strategy to combat energy poverty. I hope the Government can include a reference to such a strategy in that section once it is published.

We are at an impasse with respect to the crucial policies that will affect people with disabilities and people on low and fixed incomes now. Ireland still has no relative poverty target, although the Government's Roadmap for Social Inclusion 2020-2025 states that a key aim is to reduce the level of consistent poverty to 2% or less, with an associated goal to reduce child poverty in Ireland and ensure all families have the opportunity to participate fully in society. We are also waiting on the review to be completed on the National Disability Inclusion Strategy 2017-2021, which should feed into this legislation and the circular economy strategy. The new strategy is not ready for inclusion in this legislation but there may be room to include the current iteration, even if it is out of date.

The Europe 2020 strategy set an EU target to reduce poverty by at least 20 million people by 2020. The poverty target was crucial as it kept poverty high on the EU agenda. However, there was a failure to reduce poverty by more than 8 million people, following an increase to 123 million people being in poverty during the 2008 crisis. The Commission is currently considering proposals for an EU poverty target for the next decade, but we must still reference the existing target in legislation. Section 7 includes a reference to the United Nations sustainable development goals, but the EU is only on track to meet 26, or 15% of the 169 targets for those goals. That is very concerning.

In the meantime and while we wait for ongoing developments in the national poverty and disability strategies, we could include in the current Bill consideration of the Roadmap for Social Inclusion 2020-2025, which includes poverty targets. This is a live document and it would help assess the circular economy strategy against the targets in this roadmap.

A waste prevention strategy was launched by a Minister a number of years ago without consultation with organisations dealing with or supporting those at risk of or living in poverty. There was no consultation with disability groups, who deal with people on the ground, in the drafting of that policy. There were 36 groups consulted on the document, ranging broadly from the Restaurants Association of Ireland to the Soil Recovery Association. Unfortunately, there was a major gap when it came to those living with disabilities or at risk of poverty. This is something on which we must absolutely keep a focus.

It is not just about poverty-proofing. This circular economy Bill should also play a role in alleviating poverty by addressing the structural inequalities inherent in a linear economic model. The aim should be to support social enterprises in Ireland that provide support and employment for those living in poverty, ensuring they are more involved with the circular economy and that the circular economy products are cheaper than existing products. That would have a positive impact on those on low incomes. There is much potential in this Bill if we get it right. I know Oxfam Ireland has done a great deal of work on the poverty alleviation mechanisms within a circular economy and I recommend the Minister meet its representatives, although he may already have had those discussions. This is very relevant as products currently on the market aimed at reducing waste are really out of reach for most people. It is great we are seeing zero waste shops but they tend to be much more expensive. There should be a focus from the Government on supporting such enterprise, making them the norm rather than the novelty. During the transition we must ensure cost is not prohibitive for people on low incomes while at the same time investing in sectors to create sustainable employment accessible to all.

The environment fund has already been set up to collect the plastic bag levies and it could be expanded to include the funding of more groups using revenue generated from further levies as part of the circular economy strategy. Section 8 describes a list of sectors that can apply for funding, but it is short on any reference to organisations that aim to reduce energy poverty or the impacts the circular economy could have on people living with disability or illness, such as the man with cancer I mentioned earlier. If we are talking about poverty-proofing and ensuring there is a fair and just transition, we should use this circular economy Bill to focus on those people, and such groups should be included in the list of those who could benefit from the levies. That would ensure payments are being directed to the right areas and people.

People at risk of poverty or with disabilities must be treated as active participants in the new economy rather than being relegated to inactive participants, as they are with the current linear economic model we have today. I recommend the circular economy interdepartmental committee, referred to by the Government as the group that will look further into some of our committee's recommendations, should also include the Minister of State with responsibility for disability and the Ministers with responsibility for children and justice. These are the portfolios that cover poverty.

Without proper consultation on our climate action policies, we risk accelerating poverty and further disadvantaging people with disabilities. There will be an opportunity to engage later in the legislative process but it is important their voices and concerns should feed into policy processes at initial stages. Consultation should be active, early and thorough to make people feel they have been involved and to give the best possible result.

It is crucial to include a review clause in this Bill and I hope to bring it as an amendment when the legislation progresses through the House. This would include a review to be carried out in conjunction with poverty and disability advocacy groups to see how the Bill affects those with lower or fixed incomes and to assess whether the drafting of the circular economy strategy, the levies applied and the national food waste programme take into account the needs of those most vulnerable to transition and change. That is a key element to monitor in the progress of this Bill and its effect.

With regard to food poverty, we must be cognisant of affordability in the context of the rising cost of living. I understand there is an opportunity to address pricing of food products in the agriculture and food supply chain Bill that would establish a new authority called the national food ombudsman to enforce the unfair trading practices directive and to have a specific role in analysing and reporting on price and market data in Ireland. We might use this as another tool to help address food poverty and I call on various Ministers to ensure advocacy groups are adequately consulted in this process and on the full range of climate action policies in future.

The idea of a circular economy in the current economic context is positive but we must also be cognisant of and focused on how this new economy will treat people, particularly those who are most vulnerable in our society. It is a question of whether we include them or view them as passive actors during the course of this transition. We have an opportunity to change this by adopting a more holistic transitional approach for people in poverty or with a disability, recognising the opportunity to drive social change along with climate action.

As I do more work in this area and get older, I am developing a more holistic view across society. I originally would have been very much environmentally focused. That was my background and my area. I am now starting to see that we cannot separate the environment from how we live. We cannot separate it from every single element that impacts on people, including food costs, fuel costs and travel. It is so cross-cutting. Our responses and the legislation and policies we develop have to take into account all those other sectors. We cannot just look at it as an environmental Bill whereby if we cut plastics out of the environment, we will not have plastics in our water. We need to look at it through all the lenses required.

See this speech in context