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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1080 ..

Debate resumed from 17 April 1996, on motion by Mr Hird:

That this Assembly calls on the Minister for Urban Services to give due consideration to conducting a feasibility study to upgrade the Mitchell Waste Disposal Station to accommodate surplus household waste.

and on the amendment moved by Mr Moore:

That the following words be added to the motion: "to be located at the former Ainslie Transfer Station".

MS HORODNY (4.31): Mr Speaker, this motion is effectively about providing more facilities for the collection of household waste and is in contradiction of the Government's commitment to no waste going to landfill by 2010, as outlined in their waste management strategy for Canberra. It is also contrary to the national waste management strategy, which the ACT Government has endorsed, which seeks to reduce waste going to landfill by 50 per cent by the year 2000, based on 1990 levels. What the Government should be doing is examining ways of reducing waste generation overall and of recycling more of our waste, and not examining ways of making it easier for people to dispose of whatever waste they want to produce.

The proposal for a feasibility study to upgrade the Mitchell Waste Disposal Station cuts across work that needs to be done to implement the ACT waste management strategy. What we should be doing is looking at waste management in a holistic way across the ACT, with a specific focus on implementing ways of reducing the total amount of waste being generated. A proposal to establish a Mitchell waste disposal station merely for collection of surplus household waste would pre-empt the broader decisions that need to be made about waste reduction measures in the ACT. The ACT already has one of the best household recycling schemes in Australia. We do not want to go backwards by simply setting up mechanisms to dispose of those household waste items that are currently difficult to dispose of through the existing collection system. What we should be doing is examining ways of setting up new recycling schemes for these items, not sending them to landfill via Mitchell.

Also unclear from the motion are the financial impacts of this proposal. At present people disposing of surplus waste at landfills are required to pay a tip fee. If transfer stations are set up away from the landfills, then there should also be a fee levied on waste disposed of at these transfer stations so that people cannot avoid paying the levy. The administration involved in establishing a fee collection facility at a small and relatively less frequented transfer station may be quite inefficient.

We will therefore oppose this motion as it stands and will move our own amendment to it. We will also oppose Mr Moore's amendment, which refers to the Ainslie Transfer Station. The old transfer station at Ainslie is not in the best location for an expanded materials recycling facility. It is surrounded by the Canberra Nature Park and is relatively close to houses in Ainslie. At present the site is a real mess due to the dumping there of

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