Page 750 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 5 April 2022

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

(b) reassess charging for an additional or larger bin;

(d) investigate how a recyclable nappy rebate scheme could be introduced in the ACT, similar to other local council initiatives and report these findings to the Assembly by the end of the June 2022 sitting period;

(e) create an online option for residents to provide their feedback on the pilot and encourage participants to do so; and

(f) publicly release the feedback and results of the current FOGO trial in Belconnen.

I am pleased to speak on the motion listed on the notice paper in my name. I think we can all agree that Canberrans are very enthusiastic recyclers. They are passionate about improving our environment. Reducing food waste, food organics and garden organics—or, as we call it, FOGO—goes hand in hand with this sentiment. In Australia, food waste accounts for a few per cent of our annual greenhouse gas emissions, so anything we can do to reduce those emissions is worthwhile. Additionally, food waste costs the economy about $36.6 billion a year. From my interactions I know that most Canberrans are welcoming of the FOGO scheme here in the ACT.

Equally, many Canberrans, including myself, have already been composting their green organic waste and garden waste at home, and are very actively trying to reduce the amount of waste that their households produce. I know that our colleague Ms Clay has often spoken about this in this place. So my motion today seeks to recognise the potential of the FOGO scheme and make what is currently being trialled even more suitable for all Canberrans to access. Specifically, the thrust of the motion relates to the switch from weekly to fortnightly rubbish collections in the trial, which has met with some concern and some criticism. Again, I would like to stress that this is not because people are against the scheme; it is more because fortnightly collection is just not suitable for their households.

I understand that one of the objectives of schemes like this is to change people’s behaviours, to change their daily habits, to make them think about the choices that they make—whether they are purchasing or disposing of materials—and, overall, to reduce the amount of waste being produced by Canberra households. However, I also believe that most Canberra households are already very waste conscious and that for some, for a range of reasons, fortnightly collection of their general waste is just not a viable option.

For example, for many larger households and families there is an obvious need for weekly rubbish collection. Some of the feedback I have received—and I am sure, Mr Deputy Speaker, you have received it too—is that Canberrans, who already pay some of the highest rates in Australia, feel it is absolutely outrageous to ask them to fork out an additional cost for an additional bin or a larger bin. For example, people living with disabilities or those who have special medical needs—those who use items such as adult diapers or diapers and nappies for older children—use more bin space,

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video