Day 075 - 17 Jan 95 - Page 39
1
2 MS. STEEL: Yes, and also the company could use reusable or
3 returnable packaging?
4 A. I think that is a matter of opinion, because I would
5 want then to address that in environmental terms that would
6 take into account a whole range of things that I would
7 expect them to examine and, if I were asked for that
8 opinion, I would want to be satisfied that the in terms of
9 hygiene and in terms of energy consumption they had
10 examined those questions. That seems to me to take us into
11 another area in which I would not profess to be competent.
12 I am reliably informed about these matters, but I am not a
13 chemist nor a physicist.
14
15 MR. MORRIS: I will just ask you a few questions and then Helen
16 will finish off. Just on that last point, it relates also
17 to Coca Cola, the idea of having deposits on packaging for
18 the return of bottles or whatever, is it the case that the
19 attractiveness of that is that not only will maybe the
20 customer bring the packaging back but, presumably, if it is
21 dropped as environment/index.html">litter other people may pick it up and think,
22 "I can get some money if I return that"? Is that how you
23 see it?
24 A. I am really not basically in favour of selective
25 deposit legislation. If it were to be inaugurated it would
26 need to relate to all items of environment/index.html">litter. One of the biggest
27 problems that flows from putting value on some environment/index.html">litter and
28 not others is that it gives rise to inequities in
29 practice. This has emerged in the United States, for
30 instance, where environment/index.html">litter receptacles and environment/index.html">litter bins are
31 tipped up in the street because contained within them are
32 items of environment/index.html">litter that have value and the rest is tipped all
33 over the street. So I am really saying that deposit
34 legislation on that must be on newspapers, tobacco cartons,
35 everything that constitutes environment/index.html">litter. I am inclined of the
36 view at the moment that that is impractical.
37
38 Q. The disposables tax in Germany, you have looked at this,
39 have you?
40 A. Not in great detail but I am familiar with it.
41
42 Q. Some of it, as I understand it, and correct me if I am
43 wrong, it means that the company has to pay to the Local
44 Authority an amount per item. For example, it might be 5
45 pence for every disposable cup it gives to a customer. Is
46 that how you understand it?
47 A. It has to satisfy the Local Authority either that it
48 enters into that or that it itself sets up a means of
49 retrieval. The way in which it has worked out has been
50 that in certain circumstances -- it depends on the nature
51 of the packaging and it depends on the nature of the
52 business, but in some cases the product is returnable to
53 the source; in other cases it has to be dealt with at point
54 of sale and that may be handled by the company that is
55 actually doing the selling; or it may subsequently or
56 alternatively be handled by the Local Authority in the way
57 that you described. There are a variety of measures used
58 within the principle, which is that the producer should
59 accept the responsibility for the disposable of the waste.
60
