Page 2749 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 28 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Despite these positives there are some areas which are simply not being addressed. Continuing on my waste and recycling theme, the ACT government in the past has been very proud of its waste recycling rates and it is distressing to see that not only has there been an increase in waste going to landfill, from 0.59 tonnes to 0.67 tonnes per capita annually, but also the proportion of waste being recycled is decreasing. A peak of 75 per cent was achieved in 2005-06, slumping to a projected 70 per cent this year, which is on par with the rate achieved back in 2003-04.
Moreover, the recovery rate was set at 75 per cent this year yet only 69 per cent is the estimated outcome. But we were informed at estimates that the 75 per cent was wrongly reported and in fact it was 69 to 70 per cent. So the trend of decrease is being planned for, with the 2011-12 targets set at only 67 per cent, being a little more than was achieved in 2001-02. We were then informed of a second mistake in this reporting when the figure was, in fact, anticipated to be 73 per cent. So I must admit to being somewhat confused about what on earth it is, except one thing is clear: the figures are not going in the right direction with realised and projected recovery rates and total amount of waste going to landfill. That is clearly, clearly, clearly going up.
We were informed during estimates that this trend was a one-off event caused by waste coming from the development of ponds at Molonglo together with growth in intractable waste such as e-waste. I hope this is the case and it is all down to the ponds in Molonglo, but I really doubt that is the case because our recovery rates have been in a constant slide so the result is not unexpected from that point of view.
On the e-waste issue, as we understand it there are options for the disposal of e-waste in the ACT that the government has simply not taken up. For example a local company, Renewable Processes, which has significantly invested in establishing an e-waste recycling facility to allow local processing and social employment, wrote to the estimates committee and reported they had received differing advice from different agencies about a potential e-waste contract with the ACT government.
Procurement Solutions did not give them any information while NOWaste was assuring Renewable Processes that they would be getting contracts awarded to them. Renewable Processes planned their business around the expected work, however twice significant contracts were instead awarded to companies which do not process locally. So the question is what is going on and what is the government’s commitment to social procurement?
In contrast with what is happening in the ACT, other states in Australia continue to rapidly improve their waste recovery results and it looks like they will soon overtake us. South Australia’s resource recovery rate is now up to 68 per cent. In the last year alone, while our resource recovery rate declined, Victoria’s increased by three per cent to 64 per cent. I was dismayed to hear that the sustainable waste strategy is now estimated to be released in the fourth quarter of 2011, along with a whole heap of other sustainability policies and plans. The NOWaste strategy was reviewed in 2008, with the No Waste by 2010 strategy now expired. The yet to be released waste strategy is quite overdue. It is disappointing because for a long time the ACT was a leader in waste recovery.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video