Matt Shanahan (Waterford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State has said the Bill is designed to create more sustainable patterns of production and consumption that will minimise waste to significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. He stated that waste and resource use are minimised in a circular economy and the use and value of products and materials is maintained for as long as possible. When a product has reached the end of its life, its parts are used again and again to create further useful products rather than being discarded as is now all too familiar.

The Bill seeks to incentivise the use of reusable and recyclable alternatives rather than the range of wasteful single-use disposable packaging and other items. I know the Government today announced a tariff on disposable coffee cups and I welcome that, but what about plastic bottles? Behavioural change is required in the context of what the Minister of State is trying to adopt. In the United States, there is still a return fee on aluminium cans. Is that something Ireland can do in respect of plastic containers such as those for shampoo or other bathroom products? I am not sure whether the Minister of State has spent any time in the personal hygiene aisles of supermarket of late. He would be appalled at the amount of single-use and other plastic there. The idea that much of it is being recycled is completely incorrect. He is probably young or old enough to remember replaceable razor blades. This will require considerable change and something has to be done to get people back to preferring to use, reuse and recycle.

I am sure the Minister of State is aware there is no viable recycling of single-use plastics. They either go into landfill or are incinerated. Has anyone in his Department considered the increased quantity of single-use plastics in food packaging? Styrofoam trays are being used for meat products, while single use-plastic is used for shampoo and soap products. We need to incentivise alternative packaging such as cellulose packaging, Tetra Pak or glass instead of plastics. How is this change to be achieved in the context of the price differential? Time must be spent considering that in the context of the Bill.

As regards food waste, significant volumes of food and fruit are produced and imported into this country every year but never find their way into consumers' fridges. Best before dates are utilised to ensure food integrity but there is often a significant difference between the best before date and when a product is actually out of date. Much of this food waste ends up as organic waste and in some cases can be used as animal feed but much of it could be used in biological digestive systems for energy production. However, we do not have our act together yet to incentivise that activity or get any production from it. Is the Minister of State aware that it is producers who suffer the cost of this food waste rather than supermarkets or other retailers? If one wants to tackle the issue of food waste in the supermarket sector, one needs to look at the purchasing practices employed by supermarkets. They order minimum supply quantities and when products go unsold, that is at the expense of the producer.

The Minister of State mentioned the circular economy fund provided for in the Bill. He stated this is building on the objectives of the environment fund. He is proposing that this fund be developed through the Bill, with the aim being to fund key environmental projects in the coming years. Those are lofty aspirations. Are these environmental projects to be evaluated and assessed into the future? I have worked with many companies in the food sector that are seeking to develop significant innovation in terms of manufacturing, packaging, increased shelf life, etc. and, in nearly all cases, the level of and access to State resourcing was almost negligible in the context of supporting that activity. It is my experience that we do not have a great record in transformational innovation in this country unless it comes from the university sector. It largely tends to be ignored when it comes from the commercial sector. As I stated, these are lofty ambitions but ring-fencing money for use in research and development that is not properly spent is just another form of taxation. I am interested to see the proposals of the Minister of State in respect of the circular economy as the legislation moves on.

As regards the amendments to the Waste Management Acts, fly-tipping and dumping have been mentioned by several Deputies. Those activities are a scourge and a blight on the rural environment in particular. While I was a councillor, I was engaged with Waterford environmental teams in the disgusting activity of going through domestic waste bags dumped on the roadside to look for evidence that would pinpoint the person responsible. I was amazed even then with the evidence found, such as receipts and correspondence. The difficulty there was in pursuing a prosecution. While a member of Waterford City and County Council I asked several times for CCTV to be deployed at a number of problem dumping spots but was informed by the executive that this was not possible because of general data protection regulation, GDPR, issues. When I tried to set up a private group conducting video monitoring, I was told I was in danger of ending up in the courts because of data legislation. I note the Bill suggests that number plate recognition or facial recognition is not to be used in this video data. I await the thoughts of the Minister of State on what evidence can be brought to bear in terms of video analysis without some recognition of vehicle identity that will result in prosecutions for fly-tipping and serial dumping.

I welcome the proposals to incentivise the better segregation of waste streams for the commercial sector, leading to greater waste being diverted into recycling or organic bins. However, much of this waste may offer a compostable agriculture product opportunity and this is an area the Department needs to seriously consider. Organic waste can be a significant alternative to fertiliser products in agriculture. All present are aware of the current problems we are having internationally in terms of sourcing and paying for fertilisers. I ask that the Department do significant work on this.

I welcome the ban on the exploration for and mining of certain fossils fuels such as coal, lignite and oil shale. That is progressive.

In summation, there is much in the Bill to be welcomed although it must be stated that much of it is aspirational at this time. Many of the objectives, particularly in respect of consumer behaviour, will require a significant degree of cultural shift. There are likely to be additional supply chain costs to be borne and that will affect the end price. How will that be managed in the context of imported competitor products? One thing is certain - it will be difficult to change consumer behaviour without some cost-benefit recognition on the part of consumers.

8 o’clock

This will not happen without significant re-education and reinforcement on both the environmental damages that are being caused by our present consumption patterns and the possible environmental benefits that can accrue if we adopt a new reuse-recycle policy.

I welcome that the Minister of State's Bill sets out a roadmap for the future circular economy. Although, like many, I fear its publication may be a great deal easier to complete than the practice it wishes us to change. I, therefore, ask that the Minister of State and his Department engage early, often and repeatedly with manufacturing, trade and retail sectors so that the policy objectives he desires in this Bill may be mutually agreed and may possibly be permitted in the future. Gabhaim buíochas, a Cheann Comhairle.

See this speech in context