GreenYes Archives
[GreenYes Home] - [Thread Index] - [Date Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]

Re: [greenyes] Ontario Bill 90 - Producer responsibility versus subsidyfor curbside
My apologies - typo!... For PPSReview please go to
http://www.productstewardship.org/ppsrev21.PDF
BB

Ben Bennett Communications wrote:

Hi everyone
Product & Packaging Stewardhip Review has been tracking this in some detail (with appropriate comment) from Day One. For the latest issue go to http://www.productstewardship.org/ppsrev21,.PDF
Ben Bennett
Publisher
Product & Packaging Stewardhip Review



lkingeco2@no.address wrote:


Dear GreenYes Colleagues,

Re: Ontario Bill 90 and the Blue Box Program Plan

The Conservative government in Ontario, Canada, is taking heat for the Blue Box Progam Plan to implement a system of packaging fees under Bill 90 adopted in 2002. While Corporations Supporting Recycling (CSR) -- including major consumer product companies like P&G and Clorox -- supported the bill, the plan developed by Stewardship Ontario has drawn intense criticism for its cost and complexity.

Under Bill 90, industry must reimburse local government for 50 percent of the cost of the Blue Box curbside recycling. Many like government officials many think this sounds interesting, right?

But since last year, cost estimates for Blue Box programs in Ontario have nearly doubled, recycling costs per ton of material are much higher than originally projected, and the administrative costs are about 2 and 1/2 times the projected first year fees.

I first learned about the situation from Raymond Communications and have begun researching the issue. You can learn more by going to Packaging World online, to read the lead story based upon Michele Raymond's news release of August 11, 2003. The Internet address is: www.packworld.com

Stewardship Ontario has a web site with the plan, comments and interesting links:
www.stewardshipontario.ca or www.stewardshipontario.org


Industry has no role in the management of the Blue Box program. Ironically, the more a material is recycled, the more "stewards" (consumer product companies or first importers) pay.

There is no financial signal to encourage source reduction, reuse or utilizing recycled content. And local government isn't required to use these funds for recycling. So little improvement is anticipated by critics of this recycling plan. Environmental benefits appear virtually nil.

The Ministry of Environment initiated a new round of stakeholder discussions today, after receiving about 90 sets of comments. Comments received earlier from the Recycling Council of Ontario and Nestle are posted on the Stewardship Ontario web sited, and reflect many of the most important issues. While many who commented on the plan praised how quickly it was drafted, most people feel there was insufficient time for evaluation and consultation.

As a recycling advocate for 14 years and environmentalist for most of my life, the Blue Box Program Plan looks less like "producer responsibility" and more like a simple industry subsidy. I would welcome comments and a dialogue with any interested individuals or organizations.

Lance King
Community Solutions
(703) 536-7282





-- Ben Bennett Communications "We only work for nice people"

127 Wyndham St. N, Suite 100 Guelph, Ont. N1H 4E9
Tel: 519-823-1188 Fax: 519 823-0084
Email: bbc@no.address
Web site:http://www.bbc.guelph.org






 


[GreenYes Home] - [Date Index] - [Thread Index]
[Date Prev] - [Date Next] - [Thread Prev] - [Thread Next]