Examination of witnesses (Questions 680
- 691)
TUESDAY 21 NOVEMNER 2000
MS JANE
STEPHENSON and MR
ANDY MOORE
680. What I am trying to explore is if you think
you could overcome the difficulties in the system with the major
operators and comments that have been made about the ESA.
(Ms Stephenson) Possibly. We also feel quite strongly
that not enough of the landfill tax credits go into sustainable
waste management projects and that has been a problem right from
the very beginning. We know that the government is trying to put
pressure on landfill operators to put more money into category
C projects but we think much more could be done on that.
681. There is a lot of talk from a lot of people
in the waste industry about lack of markets for recycled materials.
What is your view?
(Ms Stephenson) It is an issue but it is probably
not as much of an issue as some people like to make out. In our
20 years of experience, we have never had a problem with marketing
our materials. We have sometimes had a problem with the price
we get for them but that is a different issue.
Mrs Dunwoody
682. It will be an issue if people cannot afford
to collect it, will it not?
(Ms Stephenson) We struggled for 20 years plus with
the idea that recycling should pay for itself. We do not expect
landfill sites to pay for themselves. We quite accept that, with
landfill sites, if the standards increase it becomes more expensive.
We do not say to the landfill operators, "I am very sorry
but you will have to find that money from somewhere else."
683. No, but a local authority faced with a
form of operation, required to keep their overall costs down,
will evaluate things, whatever the moral rights and wrongs of
it, on is this easy, quick and of good value to my council tenants
or is it expensive, more difficult, not receiving the response
we expect and at the end of it we are going to finish up with
a product we cannot sell or make any money back on or at least
cover our costs.
(Ms Stephenson) I am not saying it is not an issue.
It is very welcome that WRAP has been set up and is going to be
addressing this as a priority. There is a need to develop new
markets and we have contributed to that ourselves in the past.
We are looking at using glass for aggregate now, not just for
recycling. There are lots of different things going on up and
down the country. What is equally an issue is the establishment
of the collection infrastructure to make sure the materials are
there because you will not get new industries building up unless
they can be sure of their sources of material.
Christine Butler
684. Can I ask about the Waste Resources Action
Programme? Do you think that WRAP can help resolve that situation?
(Mr Moore) Yes. It is very welcome. Even though we
may be saying that about markets, that we have not had a problem,
we are not saying that market development is not required and
in very large measure indeed. The 25 or 30 million, whatever it
is, for WRAP is probably relatively measly according to what we
think is actually required.
685. What do you think will actually spur this
innovative thinking that is needed to establish the market for
recycling materials and for the private sector to achieve some
success, because that must happen for everything else to flow.
Where do you think the push ought to be?
(Mr Moore) We should look at the value that is already
in some of the made up products. I am not an expert. The automatic
assumption is that it should be put back into whatever sort of
product it was before it arrived in the waste stream. I am not
sure that is always the right way to look at it. We have heard
particularly from David Dougherty[1]
who has been advising WRAP of late about some very innovative
uses for glass, for example, which do not involve making it into
bottles again.
(Ms Stephenson) It is a two pronged attack. It is
about market development and developing the collection infrastructure.
You will not get industry to invest in new processing if they
are not sure that they can get the supply.
Mr Benn
686. We were talking a little earlier about
white goods. I would be interested in hearing to what extent your
members in the organisations you are involved in take these either
to dispose of them in other ways or to try and renovate them and
whether you think, as we develop the market for recycling, that
for products like that we should be moving increasingly towards
the responsibility of dealing with the original producer of it;
or do you see that your organisations have something to add to
that process? Are there things that you could do with those products
that maybe the producers would not?
(Mr Moore) It is both really. We have been welcoming
the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive,
which I am sure you have in mind. Those members of ours who are
dealing in white goods and furniture renovation generally have
been lobbying very heavily because in the original draft, yes,
producer responsibility was very clear but it was not clear what
role the social economy had to play in returning those goods etc.
It was very clear that they would simply go back to manufacturers
or manufacturers' agents. We spent quite a lot of time working
with the relevant person at the European Commission to get that
right. Yes, I think there is a big role to be played. The social
economy is always under estimated. For example, the Furniture
Recycling Network, which is a slightly separate network from the
Community Recycling Network, is actually much bigger. There are
loads of furniture recycling projects, all around the country.
All of them are contributing substantially to the social economy
and they are saving material resources by renovating white goods
that might otherwise have gone to the tip.
Chairman
687. Doorstep collections encourage waste, do
they not?
(Mr Moore) It depends how it is done. Earlier, I said
that we felt we had to treat people as intelligent human beings.
If you engage with the public very fully and get them to separate
their waste, I think doorstep collections are the right way to
go because when we have moved beyond simply collecting materials
for recycling, when we have achieved those high rates, something
has to start coming from the other end to meet us in terms of
waste minimisation and reduction. Things like that will involve
purchasing choices and all kinds of things like that. I would
say no, they do not encourage waste. I am constantly concerned
that we are giving people some kind of absolution as we are taking
their box away, but on the whole I think it is the right way to
go because we simply need to educate people about waste. There
is no better way of doing it than making them do something practical
on a weekly basis.
688. Do I get more absolution if I put out four
empty bottles instead of three?
(Mr Moore) No; you just get more of a hangover!
(Ms Stephenson) When we set this project up, the original
aim was to get them to think about waste reduction. Our experience
was that they could not engage with that at all until they had
got into the habit of recycling. You have to start with where
they are now and help them to move forward.
689. You undermine your own schemes, do you
not, if you encourage people to reduce the amount of glass and
paper that they are putting out?
(Ms Stephenson) That comes back to what our rationale
is. We are not there just to run recycling schemes. We are there
because we are concerned about waste. If we do ourselves out of
a job, so be it, but—
690. Do you think you have had as much success
in encouraging people to minimise the waste they produce as opposed
to collecting new waste that has been produced?
(Ms Stephenson) Not as yet, no, because the starting
point for most people when they talk about waste is they want
to recycle. We have had to work very hard to get the recycling
services in. Once they are doing that, then you can start to talk
to them about the other issues.
(Mr Moore) It is not a reason not to start talking
to them about it already though.
691. Thank you very much for your evidence.
(Ms Stephenson) Just before we go, if any of you ever
want to come and visit any of the projects that we run, you would
be very welcome.
1 Note by witness: David Dougherty is an official
advisor to WRAP. Back
| 
