Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
540-550)
HILARY BENN,
MP, MR ROY
HATHAWAY AND
MR ANDY
HOWARTH
4 NOVEMBER 2009
Q540 Lynne Jones: I recommend it.
Hilary Benn: Certainly lots of
people have done so. I think it is really good that this has been
highlighted. There are lots of things that can be done and need
to be done. One is to recognise the scale of the problem so when
we published the research WRAP had done a year and a half ago—and
it got a lot of coverage—people probably had not thought
a great deal about this beforehand. Out of this came the Lovefoodhatewaste
campaign that you have kindly referred to which I think is good.
I was listening to one of the supermarket chiefs only this morning
talking about how they deal with carrots. He was saying they make
a virtue of the fact that they take the standard size ones and
sell them for one price and then they sell the big ones in a value
pack and the small ones they sell in a different way but they
try to use all of the food because they were very keen on not
wasting anything from the suppliers they get their food from.
Q541 Lynne Jones: That is Waitrose?
Hilary Benn: The person who was
speaking this morning was Marc Bolland of Morrisons as it so happens
at a WRAP conference that I spoke at first thing. Others have
made commitments that they are going to send zero food waste to
landfill and they are organising it. Since you mention anaerobic
digestion, frankly that is a wonderful source of energy generation
and we have put a lot of incentives in place, we doubled the Renewable
Obligation Certificates (ROCs) last April. The Environment Agency
now classifies what comes out at the end of it as a product and
not a waste and we have put £10 million into demonstration
plants. Frankly, it is just waiting as a technology to take off
and I think will have an important contribution to make. The Landfill
Tax of course has an impact here because it costs if people do
that. There is the ban that I referred to that we are going to
consult on. I think the final thing I would highlight is labelling
because a little while ago I talked about some of the labelling
that we as consumers find a bit confusing. Not "use by"
because use by is really, really important, that is food safety,
but when it comes to "sell buy", "display until",
"best before" some clarity there for us as consumers
would be helpful. Another issue that is being highlighted is BOGOFs.
You can offer half the quantity for half the price, which is the
same difference. I was very interested to see one retailer very
recently saying they are going move to "buy one now and get
one free later", so these are all examples, it seems to me,
of things that can be done and some people are doing already to
try and deal with the problem that you have rightly identified.
Q542 Lynne Jones: But you are concentrating
on not sending stuff to landfill and possibly using anaerobic
digestion instead. What about the fact that we are wasting good
food? It is immoral to be sending good food to anaerobic digestion
when it either could be consumed by humans but more easily perhaps
consumed by animals for example. It is not just in the supermarkets,
it is also in the production, these factories—Northern Foods
producing huge amounts of ready meals, they are producing an enormous
amount of good food that is wasted. We can separate the meat from
the non-meat if necessary. Why are we not feeding good food to
humans where we can and where we cannot feed it to humans at least
put it into the animal feed chain?
Hilary Benn: I like crust but
you would have to ask the supermarkets why, if that is their practice,
they chop the ends off. If consumers say they are quite happy
to have one of their sandwiches that has crust and the rest that
do not, maybe that would help change it. As far as feeding waste
food to animals is concerned, as you will be only too well aware,
we have had some real difficulties in the past that this Committee
has looked into.
Q543 Lynne Jones: For example that
factory that is chopping off its bread, that is just bread, why
is that being sent to anaerobic digestion?
Hilary Benn: I do not know the
particular factory and I do not know what else they are producing
and what other food waste there is and whether any of it is meat
waste, but I think one would have to be pretty darn cautious given
what has happened in the past about returning to a practice that
we know created real difficulties. The best thing absolutely is
to reduce the production of the waste in the first place and we
as consumers have a part to play in that because we know from
the WRAP research that about a third of food goes into the bin
and about half of that is useable and it costs the average family
400 quid a year and if you have children it is 600 quid a year
so we have a pretty strong incentive to try and make sure that
we only buy what we know we will be able to consume.
Lynne Jones: I hope you finish reading
the book.
Q544 Chairman: That last point you
were making about the consumer, Secretary of State, the consumer
is certainly confirmed in evidence that the Committee has received
from the Co-op who are doing some very good things in reducing
food waste, but they do comment that consumers have been identified
as the largest source of food waste, so there is clearly a lot
of public education to be done. Just before we move on, can I
just take us back to the discussion we were having a moment ago
about commercial and industrial waste. I have just refreshed my
memory by looking at Defra's vision for commercial and industrial
waste and whilst it is perfectly true it confirms the improved
data on commercial and industrial waste that you are collecting,
as far as I can see, it is a target-free zone. Why have you not
espoused any kind of target-setting in this particular area whereas
in domestic waste you are very strong on targets?
Hilary Benn: I think for the reason
that Roy gave a moment ago because the character of commercial
and industrial waste differs enormously depending on which bit
of commerce or industry you are talking about. It would not be
sensible to have an overall target and that seems to me a very
well-made point. The second thing is when you have got an up-to-date
picture, given that we have not done a survey since 2002 of what
the make-up is, which is why getting all of the samples in all
of the areas and for all of the industries is so important, then
that is something that we can consider, but it did not strike
us as terribly sensible to do that in advance of having a reasonable
evidence base on which to set a target.
Q545 Chairman: If it is in the `too
difficult' column and when you have got your up-to-date information,
are you going to keep it up-to-date with the idea of being able
to at least publish trend data on an annual basis so that the
waste industry can see collectively how it is doing in the categories
that you are collecting information about?
Mr Hathaway: We will see. I accept
that seven years is too long between surveys. I do question whether
doing a survey of businesses' waste every year would be the right
thing to do.
Q546 Chairman: If it is about behaviour
and attitude, and I accept the point you make about the commercial
imperatives occasioned by, for example, the cost of landfill for
business and the fact that companies are becoming more environmentally
conscious in all the ways that you have described, and if you
want to effect some behavioral change, comparisons/league tables
are perhaps crude but nonetheless quite effective ways of putting
pressure on people to do better. If for example you have an individual
enterprise that says we are beating the national average for recycling
in this area, some people would say tick the box, jolly good,
but unless you at least have some regular update on the data then
you cannot have that as a benchmarking exercise for business and
commercial waste producers.
Mr Hathaway: In the long run we
will have the electronic data from the information that is routinely
provided to the Environment Agency from the regulated community.
When that is fully in place on an electronic basis we will have
in real time much more up-to-date data. In the meantime while
we are working towards that I think there is a question as to
how frequently is the right frequency to carry out a national
survey which is quite expensive for us as a department and for
the taxpayer and it is also a little bit burdensome on the receiving
businesses.
Chairman: We will move back to the area
of local authorities and close with some questions from David
Lepper.
Q547 David Lepper: On food waste
can I put in a plug for the Fair Share Scheme, of which I think
you will be aware, which operates in my constituency and elsewhere
in the country with very good results. However, I agree it is
reducing the amount that is on the shelves rather than what is
left over on the shelves that is important. This time last year
when we were doing the first stage of our inquiry into waste,
the economic downturn meant that there was a concern about the
market for recyclable material and the 12 months exemption was
introduced to enable the storage of recyclates. I think it is
the Environmental Services Association again which have suggested
to us that that 12-month exemption period might not have been
long enough. Has Defra done any work to look at how widely that
exemption is being taken up and if there is a need to extend it
or have market conditions changed so much that we do not really
need it any more?
Hilary Benn: Just very briefly
commenting on Fair Share, I did indeed have the chance to see
them at work in Brighton and it was very interesting talking to
them about which companies were prepared to give them surplus
food, going back to Ms Jones' point, and which were not, particularly
bigger companies that worry, "Will we be held responsible
for what happens to the food after the event?" There was
a lot of attention and concern expressed at the time of the recession
beginning and I think some of the reporting gave the suggestion
that the whole market was collapsing around our ears. We know
that was not actually the case. Sure, prices dropped because people
stopped buying for a while, including in China, but there is no
doubt that prices have recovered and, as I understand it, and
Roy will correct me or add to this, there were a relatively small
number of applications for additional storage capacity which I
think were dealt with. To be honest, I have not looked recently
at whether anyone is making the argument that we need to continue
with those exemptions but Roy might be able to assist us.
Mr Hathaway: No, in fact the market
within six months or so returned more or less to normal. The prices
were not quite back to the peak that they were a year or two before
the recession but they were back to the average long-term prices
for recyclable commodities. Thus the market has resolved the problem
and there are no requests for additional storage coming through
at the moment. Even in 2008 with a big turn down in the fourth
quarter, as a country, we were able to meet our packaging recycling
targets under the EU Packaging Directive and of course we have
not got the full year figures yet for 2009 but certainly for the
vast majority of materials the signs are quite good that we should
be able to meet those recycling targets this year as well.
Q548 Lynne Jones: Can I come back
to this point about the amount of food waste from manufacturing
compared to household. I have got a report from the Institute
of Civil Engineers and they said in 2005 there was 2.6 million
tonnes of household food waste and 7.19 million tonnes of manufacturing
food waste, so before it even gets to the consumer there are huge
amounts of waste, and they said that 1.8 million tonnes was discarded
to landfill. That may have gone down since then, but it is a huge
amount and I would urge that we need to give as much attention
to this side of food waste as to household food waste.
Hilary Benn: I accept that entirely.
When it talks about industrial food waste, presumably that is
not just those who are making and preparing food but it would
also be food being thrown out from canteens and businesses and
premises up and down the country. I will get a copy of that report
and have a look at it.
Q549 Chairman: Can I conclude by
asking one question about local authority waste. There has been
a sea change and many local authorities are doing extremely well
with their recycling targets, but there is still a diversity of
recycling services that are offered by authorities. I appreciate
it is a matter which is devolved to the authority but I think
people get a bit frustrated when they hear that next door they
recycle this but where they are they do not do it. What efforts
are being made to try and improve the uniformity of recycling
services? For example, we have just been talking about food waste.
That is one of the bones of contention because not everybody has
their own little digester in the garden and some people would
like to have a more collective service just as for example they
would with green waste but they are not always as well dealt with.
How are we going to get improved overall performance?
Hilary Benn: We have said, from
memory, by the time we get to 2020 there is a range of materials
that we would be expecting local authorities to collect. The truth
is if you look back at where this all came from, yes, the Government
could at some time in the past have said, "All of you, you
are all going to do the following things: you are going to have
a blue box and a green box and collect this on a Monday and this
on a Wednesday," and so on but I think the truth is the better
policy was to say, "It is going to cost you an arm and a
leg if you carry on chucking this stuff away," which is what
the Landfill Tax does and it has worked very effectively. The
reason I say that is because the price you pay for the diversity,
to which you have drawn attention Chairman, and I absolutely understand
the point, is it does allow local authorities to come up with
things that work for them and their types of housing tenure, the
geography of their streets and so on and so forth. I think it
would be quite hard to prescribe that from the centre. I am not
persuaded that it would be a sensible thing to do. The other end
of the equation is the frustration that we have as consumers when
we buy something and we peer at the bottom and it says "not
currently recyclable" because there is the point as to whether
your local authority is going to collect it—and I would
certainly like more local authorities to be collecting food waste;
it works a treat—but also when you see, peering at the bottom
of this cup "not currently recyclable" is that because
physically and technically you cannot do something with this or
is it that there is not a market. I think from the consumers'
point of view, since increasingly people are committed to trying
to do the right thing, one of the additional ways in which we
can help is to make sure that the things that they do find when
they have finished their shopping and eating and sorting are products
that can be recycled in that way. I think it is a combination
of those things that will enable us to see further significant
improvements in the recycling rate. We have done not bad, albeit
from a low base, to move from eight per cent to 37 per cent in
the space of 12 years.
Chairman: I take that as an appropriate
chastisement of the fact that before us we have bottles of water
and plastic cups. I did attend a meeting held by the Sustainability
Forum on Water at which the water was dispensed from a jug into
a glass so I think we could do better. Lynne has a closing question.
Q550 Lynne Jones: Just going back
to the collection of food waste, yes, by all means encourage local
authorities to collect food waste where people are throwing it
away but it is also possible to encourage people to compost all
food waste. There are systems now like the Green Cone for people
with gardens. I do not throw any food waste away. I compost everything
using that system and I think that more people could be encouraged
to do that and it gives you an awful amount of satisfaction as
well!
Hilary Benn: I could not agree
more. There are many paths to virtue when it comes to this.
Chairman: There you are, Secretary of
State, when you are next looking for an adviser on food waste
and after Lynne steps down as being a Member of Parliament she
has just identified a new career! Thank you and your officials
very much indeed for your contributions.
| 
