Page 3028 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 14 September 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DE DOMENICO: They were pleased to see this legislation. I will, if you ask me, Mr Lamont; but I will not take on that interjection. Just believe me, Mr Lamont. I have spoken to all groups and corresponded with all community groups in Canberra who are interested, including Corkhill Brothers, Pacific Waste Management, Cleanaway, Miniskips, ACT Tidybags, Tom's Trash Paks, ACT Skip Hire, Economy Tidy Bags, Hygienic Waste and Recycling, Waste Hawk, Capital Waste and Trashpack Service, C and H Waste Disposals, Thompson's Trade Waste, Topcat Trash Packs, Waste Away Commercial Waste Management, Totalcare Industries and Wastepac. These groups were also invited to and attended a discussion forum in my office.
The department has assured me that there will be extra resources allocated to policing these tougher penalties, which all the industry welcomes, by the way, as does the Opposition. I look forward to seeing this occur and the results becoming obvious through a cleaner and tidier Canberra. We have also taken the time to consult with private enterprise waste managers from many of Canberra's main waste management businesses. In general, most people appear to have no problems with this legislation. As I said, it is good legislation based on the 1977 legislation produced by Mr Kaine. However, some people wish to know, for instance, the Government's definition of "waste". Is clean fill on a truck waste and should it be covered? Mr Connolly might want to answer that question.
Other people have problems with the tip fees, which will cost businesses extra every time it rains, as wet rubbish obviously weighs more and therefore costs more to dump. I do not know whether you can adjust to that sort of situation, Mr Connolly, but it is another of those concerns that did come out from the consultation with the people. Another problem exists with ownership. The tip fees mean that rubbish removal now becomes an additional cost on businesses. This will mean that cheaper rubbish disposal methods will be explored. The Government is addressing some of these issues, like dumping, with tougher penalties. But what about dumping in another person's rubbish bin, therefore transferring the cost to someone else? They are the sorts of concerns that have come out from talking to the people. At present there is no solution to the cost and inconvenience of locking rubbish hoppers and bins, which will be borne by the businesses and the customers utilising these services.
In other words, the Government has introduced legislation without perhaps examining fully all the unintended consequences that might occur from time to time. While at present this may be a minor problem, as commercial dumping fees increase - they are set to double as from 1 January 1994 and will no doubt become an environmentally sound way of slugging the business sector and raising revenue in the future - this problem has the capacity to become quite significant. I would also ask the Minister therefore to examine this in the light of the Bill and look at what provisions could be made to ensure that people do not dump their costly rubbish in someone else's bin, therefore transferring the cost of disposal to someone else.
We wish to point out that, now that the commercial sector is paying for the privilege of dumping rubbish, it expects some level of service in return for the taxes that it is paying. In the past there was no such expectation because, as we know, the disposal of rubbish was free. However, now that commercial dumping has become a revenue raising exercise, those operators being slugged expect to see some sort of return for their money. The roads at ACT land fill sites, for example, are seen to be a major problem, especially when trucks must travel over
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .