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

I will start with Senator Ruane. I absolutely appreciate the intention behind her amendment No. 36 to exempt people with disabilities from the provisions of the Bill.In fact, the Bill provides that regulations will be put in place to work out the details of Bill. I am happy to consider those aspects at that stage. Before we make regulations to put a levy on any particular item, it must go out to public consultation and that is provided for in the Bill. That is the appropriate time to figure out what the exemptions will be and how it will be applied.

I agree with Senators McGahon and Dooley in that the definitions are important. It is important that loopholes are not created and that we do not have unintended negative consequences. A consideration of the plastic bag levy debate was what if it turned out that the bag for life was not really a bag for life. A definition has to be put on what constitutes a reusable item and a single-use item. It is important that we get that right.

As Senator Boylan said, we are not just trying to reduce plastic use. We are trying to reduce single-use items regardless of what they are made of. The whole idea of manufacturing a product and distributing it around the world, using resources when it is made of wood or plastic, for something that only gets used for a couple of minutes or seconds is part of the problem. There are two problems: reducing plastic and reducing single-use items. Part of the answer to reducing plastic is the single-use plastics directive. We banned certain items last July in line with the EU directive, but there are other things happening within the Bill. It requires that commercial waste be segregated. Later this year, I will introduce the roll-out of a deposit return scheme through which plastic bottles will be recycled. Different objectives are trying to be achieved.

Senator Pauline O'Reilly's disallowed amendment covers the same ground that Senators McGahon and Dooley are trying to address to make sure we do not have unintended consequences and a proliferation of cheap and flimsy plastic cups replacing paper cups. We must ensure items are reusable to a large extent.

Senator Ward asked why on earth we would put a limit on the amount of money a levy could be set at. Is that correct? Is the Senator wincing at my paraphrasing of what he said?