Examination of Witnesses (Questions 635-639)
Mr Christopher Murphy, Mr Peter Jones, Mr Martin
Wheatley and Dr Andrew Craig
18 MARCH 2008
Q635 Chairman: Good afternoon, gentlemen,
you have been sitting in the audience—constituting the audience
almost—but could I start with Dr Craig and just ask you
to introduce yourself before we proceed?
Dr Craig: I am Andrew Craig, I work for the
Tees Valley Joint Strategy Unit and I am here as the Policy Officer
for the Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee, LARAC.
Mr Jones: I am Peter Jones, I am an employee
and Director of Biffa, the waste company (as we used to call it)
it is now a resource management company. I have been in the industry
for 19 years, all as a director with Biffa.
Mr Wheatley: I am Martin Wheatley, a Programme
Director at the Local Government Association, responsible for
environment issues.
Mr Murphy: Christopher Murphy, I am the Deputy
Chief Executive of the Chartered Institution of Wastes Management,
representing 7,500 professionals in the waste industry.
Q636 Chairman: Thank you. Mr Murphy,
your evidence says that you prefer the term "waste reduction"
to "waste minimisation" or "waste prevention".
Why "waste reduction" in preference to the others?
Mr Murphy: In this case we think that "waste
reduction" is the right term. We are aware that there are
a number of terms which are used to describe the activities at
the top of the hierarchy: we have minimisation, prevention, avoidance
and reduction and the use of these terms inappropriately can lead
to confusion unless they are properly defined. For example, we
have a Waste Minimisation Act, waste prevention is enshrined within
the Waste Framework and within national strategies also and we
have waste reduction pilots, the incentives for local authorities.
They are all used and we have no problem with the multiple uses
provided they are either synonymous, and that that is clearly
defined, or they are defined in themselves. I think we said in
our evidence that waste reduction is the correct term here because
it implies an active, balanced and measurable process using baseline
data on a time or on a product basis, so by all means use "reduction"
especially if it is used for targets, if it defines what we are
at, where we are now and what sort of targets we want for reduction.
Q637 Chairman: What is the relationship
between waste reduction and material efficiency or resource efficiency
and how do you link those?
Mr Murphy: It is part and parcel of a holistic
or generalistic view of prevention. Prevention or minimisation
will include specific targets, resource use, awareness-raising,
it is all implicit in this generalistic term which is prevention
or minimisation.
Q638 Lord May of Oxford: This does
have slightly the elements of angels on pinheads and I do not
want to argue about the words, but the amount of waste we produce
and the profligacy of the culture we have, just saying we want
to reduce it rather than minimise it is a substantial difference;
how do you defend that? You can reduce it easily and painlessly,
leaving much room to do more, whereas minimisation is much more
susceptible to qualification in terms of existing technologies.
Mr Murphy: Indeed, and prevention and avoidance
are also terms that are used.
Q639 Lord May of Oxford: Why do you
go for the softer option?
Mr Murphy: Because we look at prevention as
being aligned with, say, zero waste. It is a philosophy, we would
all like to get to that stage, but it is not achievable at the
present time so let us look at something which is achievable.
| 
