Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The issue of virgin plastic was specifically named. It should not be solely a matter of concern with regard to single-use items or cups. It is a general issue. Again, it is one that was specifically identified by the Oireachtas Committee on Environment and Climate Action as an issue around manufacturing and production and the fact that there should not only be a levy in terms of single-use items but around the use of virgin plastic in manufacturing. I should make clear that amendment No. 37 is not in any way suggesting that using recycled plastic should give you any kind of exemption from levies. It is more about saying that there may need to be a higher levy point to the maximum of the scope that is within the Bill where virgin plastic is being used. Again, I am limited in that regard to attaching it to those single-use items such as cups but in fact, we really should not at this point be seeing virgin plastic being used for almost anything. It is something that needs to be discouraged.Again, if that is an item which can be used five, six, ten, 20 or 30 times, it is still a problem if we are using virgin plastic, especially in view of the vast amounts of plastic already in circulation in the world and the direct fossil fuel implications of the use of new plastics. It is an area in which we should have harder measures.

On amendment No. 43, I have again specified that there is perhaps a need for clarity with one particular category. The Minister of State and I discussed this previously. There are customers who are persons with a disability and we are balancing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with a Disability, UNCRPD. A certain item may be designated as single-use plastic but I almost think it could perform two uses in that it is performing the designated use and it performs a use relating to the needs of a person with a disability. There are circumstances whereby in the case of a lack of appropriate alternatives being provided or developed, persons with disabilities rely on the use of plastic objects. Given the Indecon report on the cost of disability, which we know is substantial, we do not want the inadvertent effect of increasing that cost of disability for persons who may need such items on a regular basis. It is something to be considered in the nuance of the development of the levy.

There are a few ways to approach that matter and it has been discussed in a few different ways. This is just one example of how provision might be made. Again, in general, I really regret we are tweaking such a narrow area of operation rather than maybe introducing massively ambitious initiatives. We will come to amendments in that regard later. As we tweak the levies relating to single-use items, these are two factors that I ask be considered.