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

I thank the Ceann Comhairle, and all the Deputies for their fascinating and sincere contributions, not least because many of them were grounded in real-world experience. Thankfully, the regular pantomime has been missing from the debate and it has been very constructive. My sense was that the Deputies share the goals of the legislation and there is a general consensus in respect of the various measures and, therefore the contributions mostly related to additional measures they would like to see or to different emphases of priority, all of which I take on board. I cannot do justice to every contribution that was made over the two days of debate, so I propose that as well as addressing a number of them, we will take them up again on Committee Stage if any Deputies wish to highlight them with me.

As I indicated in my opening remarks, I will now address the recommendations of the report that came from the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action. I thank the members of that committee for their constructive engagement on the Bill throughout the pre-legislative scrutiny process and for their comprehensive report. The committee's engagement with stakeholders and experts will serve as a model for how the pre-legislative scrutiny process can enhance draft legislation and engage with the wider policy context that was under consideration.

I support the vast majority of the recommendations. They reflect a policy that can be supported by my Department. However, because many of the legislative proposals would legally require public consultation and detailed consideration, it is not possible to reflect every recommendation in the Bill. However, those recommendations will now be actively considered in the context of future legislative proposals being developed by the Department and we can find other methods to implement them.

We can all agree that any measures included in the Bill need to be evidence-based, to be seen to be fair and inclusive, and to be able to stand up to legal scrutiny and potential challenge. The Bill reflects a quite fundamental recommendation of the committee, and that is the definition of the circular economy itself. This is the first time this has been defined in domestic law. The Bill marries the most commonly cited international definition of the circular economy with elements recommended by the committee, specifically relating to minimising environmental harms.

Provision has been made for the setting of sectoral targets in the circular economy strategy together with powers to set out the actions required to achieve those targets. This change will enhance the impact of future strategies.

Specific timeframes have been introduced in respect of the review of the circular economy strategy and the food waste prevention roadmap, which was recommended, and the term "recovery", specifically in the context of providing support from the circular economy fund, has been defined to exclude incineration.

Some committee recommendations are essentially non-legislative but they are being actively considered in the context of the ongoing development of circular economy policy with the Department. Other recommendations either are matters for other Departments or will require detailed consultation with my ministerial colleagues. It is proposed to examine these matters through the interdepartmental circular economy working group chaired by my Department. It will drive progress and cross-government implementation of the circular economy strategy and its future iterations.

It should also be noted that in matters such as circular product design or the introduction of a right to repair, these measures can most effectively be implemented through EU-wide measures rather than nationally. In that regard, I understand the EU Commission launched a suite of proposals as part of its sustainable products initiative just yesterday. On the same day I was introducing these proposals on Second Stage, the EU had a large number of issues going forward as well, particularly focused on eco design. As a number of Deputies pointed out, the most important time to bring in circularity is at the time of the design of the product. It should ask if the product is being designed in such a way that it is repairable and durable. That is now being tackled by the EU. Previously, eco design considerations were very much focused on energy efficiency and on electronic goods. This Bill aims to provide a set of national policy levers that can have an impact and I believe we have achieved the right balance in doing that.

I emphasise that the introduction of the new environmental levies is not a revenue-raising measure. My expectation, and indeed my hope, is that money raised from any new levy will fall off steeply over time as consumers switch to more sustainable alternative products and avoid incurring the levy. We saw this with the plastic bag levy. I am confident in that expectation. No levy will be brought in unless there has been public consultation first, there are identifiable alternatives for consumers, and those alternatives will not impose undue costs on businesses or consumers or will not compromise food safety in any way. Any further levies beyond the coffee cup levy will be introduced incrementally on the basis of extensive consultation on each occasion and only after we have a sound evidence base that there are suitable reusable alternatives to the single-use item in question. I do not anticipate levies on non-cup items being introduced before the end of 2023.

A number of Deputies suggested the Bill is too focused on consumer behaviour and not enough on that of business, but a number of the provisions are focused directly on businesses. The waste recovery levy will make it more expensive for waste holders who do not make the maximum use of opportunities to direct material for reuse or recycling. Mandatory incentivised pricing for the commercial waste sector also specifically addresses what businesses are doing with their waste. That is to bring businesses up to the same level as the domestic user who has been sorting his or her waste for years, and it will save them money. Businesses will also have to adapt to both changes in consumer behaviour as a result of the proposed levies and, ultimately, bans on certain single-use disposable items. The coffee cup levy is merely an interim measure until we get around to banning those products. The changes that are proposed in the Bill do not in any way apply only to consumers.

On the use of CCTV and other recording technologies, I am gratified but not surprised that the debate highlighted the need to deal with illegal dumping and littering. My Department has engaged with the local government sector in detail regarding these provisions. I understand the sector is fully satisfied the proposals in the Bill are fit for purpose but I want to reiterate that I do not want to see these technologies misused. I am satisfied the Bill will provide a robust legal basis in national law for their appropriate use. It is the lack of a legal basis that has prevented use of these technologies to date and it is that central problem the Bill will fix. Some Deputies pointed out that the GDPR is used sometimes as a catch-all excuse for not doing things. That is true but that was not the case here. The local authorities were prevented from gathering video evidence of dumping. They could not use it for the purpose of obtaining convictions and they were hampered as a result. All of society suffers by that commercial dumping. This is a measure aimed at commercial operators who are illegally making money from dumping waste.

Deputies also raised the forthcoming deposit return scheme for aluminium cans and plastic bottles. This has already been legislated for. It comes under the Waste Management Act 1996. In fact, I issued statutory instruments last year that covered this and we are at the implementation stage. That is why it does not have to be covered in this legislation.

The Separate Collection (Deposit Return Scheme) Regulations 2021, published in November last, have already introduced a requirement on producers to establish a deposit return scheme or to appoint a body to operate it on their behalf. I understand that in recent weeks a company was incorporated which will design and propose a deposit return scheme for my approval. I will introduce further regulations prior to the introduction of the scheme to establish, among other things, the level of deposit for the materials to be collected.

I also draw Deputies' attention to my intention to introduce a number of amendments on Committee Stage. First, I intend to provide further mechanisms for the amendment of existing industrial emissions, integrated pollution and waste licences by way of amendments to the Environmental Protection Agency Act 1992 and the Waste Management Act 1996. The purpose of these amendments will be to allow for a broader type of amendment to these licences than is currently permitted but which will not itself alter the overall environmental impact of the activity. This is in line with the Bill's focus on smarter, more targeted regulation. Second, the general scheme provided for the establishment of a GDPR-compliant register of households without a waste collection service. It was not possible to complete the necessary consultation process required to introduce this provision at the time of publication of the Bill but I propose to do so by way of amendment on Committee Stage. Finally, I also hope to bring amendments on Committee Stage to provide for the use of fixed penalty notices for breaches of conditions attached to waste facility permits.

I look forward to further progress of the Bill on Committee Stage and I once again thank the Deputies for their contributions on this crucially important matter today.

See this speech in context