Jennie George (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I commend the member for Maranoa for placing this important issue on the parliamentary business paper. I think we all share his concern about the issue of waste management. It is a very important issue for our community generally. I want to assure the member for Maranoa that the Rudd Labor government is keen to explore ways to strengthen Australia’s recycling performance and to reduce the amount of litter in our environment.

It is the case that households and businesses continue to generate more than 30 million tonnes of solid waste each year and, despite considerable efforts and advances, around half of all that still ends up in landfill. It is estimated that Australia is producing almost 750 kilograms of waste per person annually, and of course this leads to a situation where landfills are choking and creating a costly headache for authorities, particularly local government authorities, struggling to store the rubbish and to keep opening never-ending landfill sites.

In the words of the Adelaide based CRC for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment—and I think this probably generally sums up our views on the issue:

Disposing of waste safely, permanently and economically is a challenge and a cost for every major production industry.

… whatever can be done to turn these wastes into safe, economically valuable products and to prevent them from posing an environmental or health risk in the future is highly desirable.

Of course, the key long-term aim in this debate, when we are dealing with waste management, is to have industries design products which minimise elements that cannot be reused, repaired or recycled and to educate communities to eschew overconsumption and excess packaging.

However, in recent times it has become a debate about not just reducing litter and reducing the flow of material to landfill but also, in essence, improving management of the waste stream, which is increasingly becoming part of the complex suite of solutions needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I note in more recent times that the waste industry has increased its efforts to tackle the release of methane inside landfills. Increasingly, the industry is looking to burn off the gas and, where possible, generate electricity from that process.

It is good also to see that household kerbside collection and drop-off centres for recycling have become part of daily life in many of our cities and regional areas. It is not just a matter of saving landfill space, as important as that is, but increasingly one of looking at energy use as well. As we know, there are new challenges to be met, one of the most important being the toxic e-waste stream. I read a recent report that suggested that two million old TV sets will end up in landfill this year—let alone the problem we all face with superseded computers and mobile phones. In that regard, it is interesting to note Australia’s current love affair with bottled water is leaving environmentalists very worried about the increasing toll on the planet. Not only do these bottled water suppliers suck up valuable fuels to make them but they are also adding, as we know, to the mountains of rubbish, particularly in public places. Unfortunately, while many Australians are enthusiastic recyclers at home, we do not actually provide many facilities to collect waste in public places.

The motion that comes before us from the member for Maranoa specifically raises the strategy of container deposit legislation. It is true to say that container deposit legislation is considered by many to be a potential way to increase recycling, particularly of beverage containers. As the member pointed out, consumers would pay a deposit on certain beverage containers and that deposit would be partially refunded when the empty containers were returned to a collection point, thus giving individuals an economic incentive to return used beverage containers for disposal. However, perhaps the member may not be aware that the federal environment minister, Mr Garrett, has recently discussed options for improving recycling, including CDL—container deposit legislation—with his counterpart state and territory environment ministers as recently as April this year.

That body, the EPHC—the Environment Protection and Heritage Council—agreed to investigate the merits of potential national options for improving the level of recycling of packaging wastes, such as beverage containers, and decreasing the amount of packaging litter. They believe this work will assess the environmental, economic and social costs and benefits of various options, including the option raised in the motion by the member for Maranoa. This review will obviously take into account the experiences of South Australia, which is, I think, currently the only state in Australia with CDL legislation. But the review will also look at the investigations of CDL by other states, because there are differing opinions, and it will consider the mid-term review of the National Packaging Covenant. So it will be a broader examination than just the specific focus that the member for Maranoa draws our attention to in his motion.

The National Packaging Covenant is an important issue in this debate. That covenant was a voluntary agreement established in 1999. The mid-term review, which will shortly be upon us, will assess this scheme under which the packaging industry aims to increase recycling rates of all packaging to 65 per cent by 2010. The mid-term review of that covenant will also assess its effectiveness and allow us to see whether more needs to be done to manage packaging waste in Australia.

I would say to the member for Maranoa that the issue of container deposit legislation, in our view, should be seen in much broader terms, and it is an issue that is under active investigation by the Rudd Labor government in cooperation with the states and territories. We believe it is important to understand the full costs and benefits to the community of all waste management options, including CDL. That is why the body of federal, state and territory ministers is in fact undertaking this investigation. As I understand it, the new working group will make its final report in November this year. Environment ministers have also decided to develop a national plan of action on litter reduction, given broader concerns about the impacts of litter in Australia.

Given that different studies over time have presented different views of how CDL would work in jurisdictions around Australia, it would be, in our view, pre-emptive to commit to a national program for container deposits as proposed in this motion before the necessary cost-benefit analysis is undertaken. However, I do sincerely commend the member for Maranoa for bringing this important matter to our attention and I think he can rest assured that the Rudd Labor government is taking this issue seriously. It is progressing an examination of a cost-benefit analysis and will certainly take into account the experience in South Australia and obviously the experiences that the member for Maranoa has pointed to in some overseas countries. We will make final decisions based on a very thorough examination of the issues raised in this motion.

See this speech in context