GreenYes Archives

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


Re: [greenyes] Toronto; TIB track


Helpful added info from Michele, to which I add the following comments in blue:

At 08:50 AM 2/13/2004, Michele Raymond wrote:
Clarifications on Toronto and Ontario money:

WDO is supposed to fund 50% of "net costs," including transport, collection, marketing, everything

What this means is this: cities pay all the cost of disposal of products that are not collected in Blue Box/curbside programs PLUS 50% of the difference between total curbside program costs and what they would have paid for disposal of curbside materials ("diversion credit). This means that producers pay "a fraction of a fraction" of the total costs of managing their discards. The lion's share is paid by the public.


That is not nothing' the the costs have doubled several times

Moreover, Ontario has an inefficient system with 70 MRFs when it only needs 20 I understand.

Industry is being asked to pay for an inefficient system that REQUIRES all cities over 5,000 to have a curbside program even if its NOT efficient. There is technically no limit on what cities can claim are their "costs" though politically this will all go back to negotiation

This system will cost industry about $150 million over two years., because of set up costs to CALCULATE fees, and not counting the other 50% government continues to foot

Effectively, producers are being forced to pay into the municipal system over which they have no control. Indeed, as Michele points out, there is no assurance to these producers that the programs provided by cities and towns are "efficient". In contrast, British Columbia's programs require the brand-owners (or their designates) to design an efficient system of their own choosing and deliver it, recovering ALL THE COSTS from consumers (or choosing to internalize those costs in the product price). Cities and towns are OUT OF THE LOOP if they so choose, freed up to focus their municipal programs around materials that are more appropriately managed through curbside collection -- e.g. yard trimmings, fibre...


Industry s only power is that purse to push efficiency

While it is true, the MORE they recycle, a material, the MORE industry is CHARGED (The WRONG incentive)

This is an inevitable consequence of industry taking on a responsibility that they have down-loaded onto the public and Mother Nature for a century. The way the incentive will work in a properly designed EPR program (which has yet to emerge, due in part to the precedent of DSD in Germany) is that the firms that devise the most efficient take-back and recycling systems win in the marketplace because they can provide their valued consumers with better (recycling) service at a lower cost than their competition.


ALL packaging, even if it does NOT go into blue box, is being CHARGED these complex fees.

I would think there are grounds here for the fillers to challenge the fees in court -- but we can be sure their lawyers are looking into that...


There are many sides to this debate

I dont like this system. I dont recommend that other provinces initiate -- if they MUST charge industry and cant TAX which is SIMPLE, then try the European style system which gives industry a little more control.

"Tax" is not simple: it takes the funds and puts them out of reach of everyone! Michele and other observers of EPR should look at the BC system which gives industry control -- but with accountability to the public through reporting and requirement to submit business plans and have them approved. I'm not sure which "European" system Michele is thinking of - my impression is that there is no single "European" system.


No system is perfect, and NO fee system will ever be totally fair.

Correct. But there is something inherently unfair about a "fee system" that is administered and imposed on all brand-owners by a monopoly (DSD/WDO -- or for that matter Encorp & Product Care in British Columbia!). What we need to get past in EPR is setting up industry "utilities" that have the dangerous power to tax businesses.


This will be discussed at the Take it Back WEST conference, March 1-3, near San Francisco

Be there!!

We have an affordable government track on March 3 that include the BIG electronics debate!!


Michele Raymond
Publisher
Recycling Laws International/ State Recycling Laws Update
5111 Berwyn Rd. Ste 115 College Park, MD 20740)
301/345-4237 Fax 345-4768
http://www.raymond.com





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