Clause 1 - Target years

Part of Waste and Emissions Trading Bill [Lords] – in a Public Bill Committee at 9:30 am on 3 April 2003.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Michael Meacher Michael Meacher Minister (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) (Environment) 9:30, 3 April 2003

I have no idea, but that could be the case.

The third point about the amendment is that waste tends to be compressed before it becomes landfill, so volume is less of a problem. Landfill gate charges are also calculated by weight. Furthermore, the UK obligation under article 5(2) of the landfill directive, which the Bill is designed to implement, relates to reductions by weight, so we must set the targets by weight.

One always recognises that hon. Members do not have the same facilities as Ministers, but the amendments do not provide a way of measuring volume, although I am not suggesting that we could not find one if we put in enough effort. The requirement to set targets by volume, which the amendments would insert, would therefore be unworkable. That is not intended to be a sneering remark on the part of Ministers, because we could tackle the issue. The point, however, is that it is not a relevant consideration in terms of the landfill directive.

Perhaps I can turn now to the other points that arose. I am very concerned about recycling plastics. The highest priority is to recycle all compost, or biodegradable waste, which consists mainly of paper, card, and kitchen and garden waste. As it biodegrades in landfill sites, it produces greenhouse gases, which is why we focus on the weight, not the volume, of waste. Paper and card make up almost one third of the total, and kitchen waste makes up about one fifth of it, so those are by far the largest fractions. The economics of recycling are currently much more difficult for plastics than for other fractions of the waste stream—therein lies the problem.

I was asked how we are trying to tackle that. The Government and the devolved Administrations have set up the waste and resources action programme to tackle the market barriers to increased recycling. WRAP has identified plastics as a priority in its business plan for 2003–04—the current year. One of WRAP's priorities is to market existing recycled plastic products and to remove discriminatory standards. That is linked to the development of ''buy recycled'' policies and to a research and development programme to develop plastics recycling technology and support composite product development.

One of WRAP's targets is to achieve a 20,000 tonne increase in the mixed plastics processing for industrial products by 2003–04. It intends to award a grant to address the lack of a plastics sorting or processing infrastructure in the UK, which it says should result in an additional 20,000 tonnes per annum of post-consumer plastic bottles being diverted from the waste stream.

Trials are being undertaken on different ways of collecting plastics, notably sorting it prior to collection, collecting it with heavier materials such as glass and then sorting it, and crushing plastic bottles to reduce their volume. As hon. Members have said, plastics recycling is popular. I receive a great number of letters, including some from members of the

Committee, and I find that the message is increasingly being acted on, as local authorities respond to local pressure. I acknowledge that it is a serious issue.

Under the packaging waste directive, we are obliged to set packaging waste reprocessing targets. Last year, our target was 50 per cent., and we just failed to meet it because of the notorious failure by one compliance body. We achieved only 48 per cent. However, the targets for 2006–08 are now under discussion in Brussels, and we expect that the packaging waste target will be set at between 60 and 65 per cent., which would be a big increase in a fairly short period. I mention that because it is linked to material-specific recycling targets; and the one for plastics, which is by far the lowest, is expected to be substantially increased.

The hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker) asked what market signals the Bill was sending out. It is sending out a strong signal. Because it will result in a drastic reduction in the amount of materials, including plastics, going into landfill, there will be a premium on the development of new technologies to find alternative ways to recover, reuse or recycle plastics, and on the onward use of plastic products. That is a major effort, which WRAP is designed to encourage.