Skip to Content

Waste Management/Recycling

Container Deposit Legislation

The Associations are strongly supportive of a container deposit system for beverage containers for NSW and nationally. Some resources have been prepared to assist councils to conduct local campaigns.


Campaign


Useful links:


National Packaging Covenant

The Associations continue to be involved in negotiations regarding the revision of the National Packaging Covenant. The Boomerang Alliance (the alliance of environmental and local government groups) is pressing for ambitious targets for recovery of packaging / containers, to increase them substantially from their current rates (in the order of 30% or even less for some types of containers). Industry are seeking moderate increases from what they claim to be already impressive figures (around 50%).

The Boomerang Alliance are also seeking to have targets disaggregated, ie applied individually to different types of packaging (PET, glass, aluminium, paper, steel). Industry prefers a single aggregated target, as the good performers (paper, aluminium) serve to raise the average and mask the low performers (plastics and glass)

One of the major issues, and undoubtedly a point for future debate, is, how will these increased return rates be funded. Attempts have been made to quantify the costs of increasing return rates through kerbside and away-from-home, and the views of several councils have been sought.

Generally, councils' response was that increasing tonnages through kerbside would involve considerable cost, and kerbside may be operating at or near capacity (albeit low). In the case of away-from-home, councils generally felt that contamination and apathy issues made this a largely futile pursuit. This leads one inexorably to the conclusion that a deposit/refund system would ensure high return rates from home and away-from home containers, at a minimal cost compared to the huge cost of trying to achieve these return rates through kerbside and coloured public place bins.

The Boomerang Alliance firmly maintain that any additional costs will not be borne by local government.

The Environment Protection and Heritage Council, consisting of State and Federal Environment Ministers, commissioned Nolan ITU to undertake a Regulatory Impact Statement to investigate the cost(s) of likely scenarios under the revised Covenant. The RIS, in fact, asserted that local government will benefit financially by collecting greater tonnages at kerbside, which might offset moderate additional costs for collection of away from home recyclables. The Associations have prepared a submission, vigorously opposing any suggestion that there will be any financial benefit to councils in collecting additional quantities of recyclables, and reasserting that any additional costs should be borne by packaging manufacturers

There have been some organised "events" relating to this issue: The "Waste Wars" event was held in Melbourne and Sydney in March. The Sydney event, chaired by presenter Adam Spencer, was attended by over 300 people. Cr Genia McCaffery participated in the panel session, which included a lively "gloves off" debate about the worth of the Covenant and Extended Producer Responsibility issues.

On 13 April a "bottle mountain" was created in Hyde Park. This was designed to raise awareness in advance of the Environment Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC's) meeting on 14 April, to decide on the release of the RIS. Generally, this issue has attracted significant media interest, as per the attached summary

The Ministers agreed to a re-signing of the Covenant at their meeting on 1 July 2005. The Associations considered whether they should become a signatory to the Covenant at their Executive meetings in October 2005. It was resolved

1. That the Associations decline to become a signatory to the revised National Packaging Covenant and maintain a firm commitment to extended producer responsibility and container deposit legislation.

2. That the Associations offer to act in an advisory role to the National Packaging Covenant Council on the issues of relevance to Local Government.

The Associations' Presidents wrote to all councils in November 2005, providing reasons for this decision and advice to councils who might be approached individually to sign the Covenant. A copy of  the letter (135KB) can be accessed.


Litter regulation

Over the last four years the EPA (now DEC) has conducted a comprehensive campaign to target littering and has prepared material for councils to conduct their own local / regional campaigns. Further information is available from the DEC web site. The DEC has also established the Litter and Illegal Dumping Alliance. The Associations are represented on this body.


Local government involvement in recycling

The Associations have produced a guidance document for local councils, 'Beyond Recycling' to assist in the decision-making process for the provision and/or contracting of waste and kerbside recycling services, and to assist councils in consulting with their communities about this decision-making process.

The Associations engaged the Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) as consultants to prepare this comprehensive guide to councils.

The Associations are aware that the decision making process for the provision of kerbside recycling and waste collection services is complex, but that the community generally places pressure on councils to maximise the variety and volumes of materials collected. Kerbside systems are often judged on the number of different types of commodities collected and a "better" collection service is one that collects a greater variety, more frequently.

The 'Beyond Recycling' document attempts to introduce a more rational approach to decisions about this service delivery, using the "triple bottom line" approach. This approach encourages councils to look at the economic, social and environmental costs and benefits of each separate commodity, and decide whether, in fact, a separate collection service is warranted for that commodity. As these services are often contracted out, the document also provides advice on criteria to consider in the drafting of tender briefs and resulting tender bids.

By necessity, the document raises some contentious issues and will almost certainly draw criticism from some other stakeholders in the waste generation sector. It is also likely that these more rational decisions could be incorrectly seen by the community as "relinquishing their environmental responsibilities". The document therefore provides advice about consulting with and communicating decisions to the community, to avoid any misconceptions or backlash. A flier template for "badging" and distribution by council is also included.

In summary, the 'Beyond Recycling' Document aims to bring about a major shift in thinking about recycling and waste collection to optimise the environmental, social and economic benefits. This in turn will enable councils and the Associations to better position themselves politically and ultimately may bring about a system more consistent with Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) whereby the industries who produce materials which create waste are required to take a greater responsibility for those products.

The document is in two parts, and can be accessed by clicking on the link:

Download Beyond_Recycling_Part_A_080410.pdf Part A: Developing an Integrated Waste Management Strategy and Empowering the Community (3.12MB)

Download Beyond_Recycling_Part_B_080410.pdf Part B: Recycling in Context, the Current Situation (1.32MB)

Download Beyond_Recycling_flier.pdf Flier for use by councils (1.42MB)

Please note: The PDF files are quite large and will take some time to download/open. It is recommended that you save each document to your hard disk by right-clicking the link and selecting Save Target As...

Councils are encouraged to provide feedback on the document. This can be directed to Robert Verhey at the Associations email robert.verhey@lgsa.org.au.

Extended Producer Responsibility  (EPR) Forum

 
On 26 September 2006 the Associations conducted a forum on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). This forum brought together representatives from LGA, NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), Total Environment Centre (TEC), Boomerang Alliance. For copies of the presentations (if available), please click on the links below.

The NSW EPR Experience:  Presentation (38KB), Tim Rogers, Director, Sustainability Division, DEC  

EPR Forum: The North American Perspective: Presentation (2.6MB) Helen Spiegelman, Co-founder and President of Product Policy Institute

Importance of Local Government in the Transition to EPR:  Presentation (1.5MB)  Bill Sheehan, Co-founder and Director of the Product Policy Institute 

Local Government in NSW, a pivotal role, or convenient fallback? Download pivotal_role_or_convenient_fallback_leo_kelly_131006.pdf Presentation (30KB) Cr Leo Kelly, Vice President LGA and Download pivotal_role_or_convenient_fallback_leo_kelly_ppt_131006.pdf powerpoint (1.57MB) 

Recent EPR Experience from WA Dave West, Boomerang Alliance

EPR, the Environment Groups' view. Download product_stewardship_talk_131006.pdf Presentation (31KB), Jeff Angel, Director, Total Environment Centre (confirmed)


Council Management of Community Sharps Waste

The Associations have been involved in some long term discussions with NSW Health regarding the management of household medical waste, specifically "Community Sharps". This term refers to syringes used in self-application situations at home, and also to waste generated through public place injecting. In both these cases (ie where the injection is not administered in a clinic or by a visiting health care provider), NSW legislation defines syringe waste as non-hazardous solid waste, and therefore the responsibility of the local council.

While the Associations do not agree with the definition of home and public place generated syringe waste as "solid" waste, many councils have in fact developed and implemented community sharps collection and disposal services. These may involve the placement of public place receptacles, and the coordination of "point of sale" (ie pharmacy) return schemes.

Draft Guidelines which have been prepared by NSW Health in consultation with the Associations and other stakeholders are an attempt to assist more councils to develop and implement such programs. Negotiation of the wording of this document has been very difficult and lengthy, as it was necessary to ensure that it clearly stated Local Government's views on the inappropriate policy definition and the need for greater Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) regarding community sharps, as well as the need for a shared approach with other stakeholders.


NSW Health Offer of funding to support Council Community Sharps programs

The Associations have also received correspondence from NSW Health offering $200,000 over the financial years 2004-5 and 2005-6 to allocate to councils to assist in the establishment of community sharps recovery programs.

It could be argued that this "seed" funding might encourage councils to undertake programs which are initially intended to be short term but which will lead to a strong community expectation for continuance. On the positive side however, the funding could serve to highlight the cost-effectiveness of particular types of collection systems, particularly the "point of sale" schemes, which seem to operate in a very cost-effective way.

Guidelines and application forms for this funding program are almost complete and will be available for councils from August 2004. For further information or for a draft copy of the guidelines contact Robert Verhey, robert.verhey@lgsa.org.au


Medical Industries Association of Australia (MIAA) website

The MIAA have been part of the stakeholder panel in the development of the Guidelines document. While they do not accept any significant degree of extended producer responsibility (EPR) for community sharps, they have agreed to develop a web site to assist councils who are establishing community sharps collection services. Some details about this proposal are attached.

The Associations' Executives have resolved:

  1. That the Draft Guidelines for Council Management of Community Sharps be endorsed, noting the Associations' ongoing commitment to a policy position supporting EPR for the Medical Waste Industry
  2. That the Associations endorse the $200,000 funding program by being involved in the consideration of proposals and allocation of grants
  3. That the concept of a Medical Industry Association (MIAA) website be endorsed

The Guidelines will be made available to all councils when sign off has been completed, however a copy of the draft is available from robert.verhey@lgsa.org.au.


Shopping Trolley Guidelines and Code

The Associations have developed Guidelines to assist councils in the management of abandoned shopping trolleys. The Guidelines promote a cooperative approach between councils and retailers to ensure that abandoned trolleys are managed in a responsible, timely fashion. The Guidelines also provide advice to councils regarding the regulatory sanctions available for use if the cooperative approach does not work. The guidelines (114KB) have been posted on the Associations' website, to view and download.

The Guidelines are an accompanying document for the Code of Conduct agreed between the Associations and the Australian Retailers Association on behalf of their members. The Code can be used in situations where retailers display a cooperative approach towards the responsible management of their store's trolleys. A copy of the code (59KB) is also available for viewing and downloading.

The Associations would welcome any feedback on the usefulness of the guidelines and code. This should be directed to Robert Verhey at robert.verhey@lgsa.org.au.

Policy & Research