Page 3257 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The ACT has not been active when it comes to EPR. It has waited for a national approach or blamed cross-border issues. I expect that government speakers will mention the current federal discussion on e-waste management and the resolution by environment ministers to act on this. I will point out that in 2002 environment ministers also agreed that action was needed in relation to electrical and electronic equipment. Yet, we still have the same problem. The ACT could have taken some action. Even the New South Wales Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act requires the regular assessment of waste streams and allows the minister to put producers responsible on notice that they must address the issues or face mandatory EPR schemes.
The reality is that there was plenty we could have done as a single jurisdiction to enact extended producer responsibility schemes. We could have mandated compliance obligations on recyclers and importers of electrical goods or we could have implemented a fee for recycling services at the point of sale. Those are just two options. When it comes to new policies, it often takes one state or territory to lead so that others follow.
By now we should even be thinking about transcending the cradle-to-grave attitude to recycling. Today, dedicated recyclers are promoting a concept called cradle-to-cradle. These items are designed and manufactured so they can be perpetually recycled in a way that emulates nature’s patterns of renewal. The components are recyclable synthetic materials or biological nutrients which degrade naturally. Ford even developed a cradle-to-cradle car called the model U. Cradle-to-grave is an important concept but it still acknowledges that we are a society that takes, makes and wastes. Cradle-to-cradle is about eliminating the concept of waste altogether. It is a true zero waste approach.
In conclusion, dealing with the outputs of society is about much more than just making Canberra a tidy and attractive town. It is about more than preserving our land from ever-growing landfills. Our relationship with waste is fundamental in the battle against climate change. Dealing properly with it allows us to conserve our resources, and reduce the release of greenhouse gases. It is about our relationship with the planet, how lightly we tread on its environment and how we exploit its limited resources.
The Greens say that it is time to take a new, committed approach to waste management. Like the 208,000 tonnes of waste that went into Canberra’s landfill last year, this is something that is not going to go away.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Water, Minister for Energy and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (4.39): I thank Ms Bresnan for raising this matter of public importance for discussion this afternoon. Waste management is one of the key strategic areas for creating a sustainable city and is closely linked and aligned to a range of other sustainability practices adopted by the government, including moving towards a carbon neutral Canberra.
For that reason, the government considers waste policy to be a significant priority. I was therefore surprised to hear some of the comments by Ms Bresnan in her speech
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .