Anti-Bin Charges Protest

by country dweller Thu May 29, 2003 11:05

why is it that people who live in the countryside or even in most of the smaller towns around ireland have to pay to get their refuse collected, while those in dublin and cork don't? and seeing as these areas produce the most waste, should they not under the polluter pays principle, hvae to pay for these collections?

by pat c Thu May 29, 2003 11:08

That you didnt organise well enough and fight hard enough against these charges. if politicians and county managers can get away with imposing these charges then of course they will implement them.

by country dweller Thu May 29, 2003 11:45

no offense pat, but that is rubbish. People in the country have had to pay for refuse collection for years, and its not about organising and fighting, its got a lot more to do with the soaring price of waste disposal in this country. if your campaign is sucessful, then that just means we in the country are going to be paying for you too. i'm all for equality, and therefore I think that if we have to pay then so should you in the city, fair enough if your problem is with the way the charge is to introduced, as in if its not per bag or based on the volume produced, but if its simply because you don't want to pay an extra tax, then you are discriminating against your country brothers. Someone has to pay for waste disposal, and it has to be those who produce it, polluter pays principle again, same goes for water charges, its costs money to make water drinkable, but thats a whole other debate innit? this countries gone to the dogs, thats obvious, but if a charge for refuse collection(based on volumes produced) is not introduced, then who is going to pay for its safe and environmentally friendly disposal?

by ??? Thu May 29, 2003 12:00

As usual the debate focuses on the little rather than the big fish.
Example, going after people doing the double instead of going focusing on the Billions in unpaid tax in offshore accounts, loop holes in the tax system.
The reason the Bin Tax, water charges are being brought is that the government doesn´t want to go after the big fish.
If they do the heavy envelopes they continue to receive will stop coming.
Its that simple.

by pat c Thu May 29, 2003 12:23

ordinary people are already taxed to the hilt. they pay for those services through payeyes there is a need for more money, lets get it by taxing the big farmers and the self-employed. lets change the system of payouts to farmers. at present the big farmers get the most while small farmers get a pittance.

still need more money for services? yes!!!! so lets bring capital gains tax back up to 40 %. lets tax the blood stock industry. lets bring in windfall taxes on land speculation.

i reckoned you werent genuine, you just want to squeeze more money out of ordinary people.

Tax the Greedy! Not the Needy!

by country dweller Thu May 29, 2003 12:50

so what you're saying is that us subhuman boggers should continue to pay for our refuse collection while our noble city dwelling brethern fight the good fight for the people of the whole land eh? I'm all for taxing the rich, I hate the fuckers, but the rich up in the big smoke don't have to pay their charges either! while the poor down here have to pay regardless.its all good and well to say that the ordinary workin man or woman is already taxed to the hilt, tis true, and that capital gains tax should be increased(massively), but that doesn't neuralise municipal solid waste does it? someone has to pay to get it sorted while you debate on whether you should pay to get your rubbish collected. In an ideal world, we would do all the recycling jazz, people would come before profit, etc. but at the moment there is huge imbalance, and the energies being devoted to the anti bincharges campaign seem wasted to me. And also, being condescending does not lend you any weight in this debate pat.

by Terry Thu May 29, 2003 12:58

To country dweller:

I reckon the reason why waste collection in the country side is already privatised, is because it is
a lot harder to organise people over a dispersed geographical area. Also it is harder to disperse information
and find out what is going on. You might say, but what about local papers and radio. The Campaigns against
the charges have consistently sent press releases to all the major and local newspapers and they consistently
get ignored, except for the odd tit-bit. Likewise radio and even local radio, tend to be privately owned and
they consistently do not carry certain types of issues, especially when the challenge the status quo.

For example, many pirate radio stations throughout the world are often tolerated for a number of years, so long as
they basically just play music, but as soon as any of these stations start discussing the real issues and origins
of things like social justice, environment, health, local democracy etc, they are very quickly closed down.

The refuse charges are a double tax and are part of a wider front, which is to privatize pratically every major
service including eventually, health, education, water, fire-service and many other things. These stem from the
GATS agreements which have been put together by multinational corporations and through the agencies and lobbyists
have applied much pressure on governments and at EU level to get these policies adopted.

It has nothing to do with the: Polluter pays principle. To me these slogans uttered by these people and puppet
politicans is about as valid as the sign they used to put over the gates of concentration camps in Nazi Germany
which was: 'Arbeit macht frei' which means 'Work makes you free'

Just because the politicans and their backers say this policy is good, doesn't make it so. Please look into the
background of these issues and question everything.

Finally continuing on the Polluter pays Principle. The goal of this double tax is to open up a whole new sector
for the private sector to rake further money from ordinary people. The vast majority of waste created in Ireland
and indeed in other countries is from agriculture and industry. As you know years ago, agriculture waste in the
days when farming was more organic and sustainable could deal with it's waste itself, since it was organic,
ie. not made up of paper, glass, metal, plastics etc. It is industrial agriculture that produces huge amounts
of plastic, slurries and other waste.

However by far the most troublesome waste is from industry and a certain (relatively small) fraction is toxic too.
The domestic sector is being asked to pay a disportation amount in relation to industry. On top of this the
government has made absolutely no major effort to seriously put in place a recycling infrastructure. Recycling
in this country is being SETUP TO FAIL. That is why you constantly hear debates on RTE and the press about are
choice only being: Landfill or Incineration. See how they set the argument. And if someone mentions recycling,
they mutter something, like that doesn't work very well. The government has put aside 100s of millions for helping
put in place an incineration infrastructure, but token efforts at recycling. They have also previously passed
legislation about 2 years ago, that removed ALL decision making concerning waste mangement away from local councils
back to central government. Councillors are not even now allowed to propose the introduction of more recycling bins
at the local shopping centre, because that power has been taken away from them.

This issue is not about having a cleaner environment and less waste. It is the exact opposite. These incinerators
have to be fed and there is no effort to reduce the packaging of the products we buy. Industry was allowed to
put in place a voluntary program, that has done very little in this regard. You and me, meanwhile are attacked
with charges and threats of fines.

By the way, money collected in country side waste collection does NOT subsidize city waste collection. I can't
see how you make this suggestion.

by pat c Thu May 29, 2003 13:00

you shouldnt have to pay. fight back! educate! agitate! organise!

if you are genuine then contact the campaign, you will get advice and as much practical help as possible:

http://www.stopthebintax.com/

by country dweller Thu May 29, 2003 14:01

ok you put the point across well, but, we are still paying. And all I'll say is that I still think that individuals should have to pay to get their refuse collected because if people pay per unit then this should dissuade them from consuming the amount they do. Thats the big problem isn't it? Our society is used to material comfort, and doesn't really consider the effects our consumption is having on the environment.
As for suggesting that those who pay for refuse collection in the countryside subsidise the collections in Dublin, I know its not direct, but as it is being collected by both the LAs and by waste disposal companies, it indirectly subsidises it. And you're right about the voluntary industrial set-up, REPAK, it is a complete joke, I know this, I deal with them every week. But with regard to incinerators, I think they can be an important part of a proper waste management system. They deal with a certain fraction of the waste stream with which little else can be done, and that applies even to the most 'perfect' municipal waste stream. And they are relatively safe when one considers that we are perfectly happy to live in a society accepts the amount of road deaths, alcohol related deaths etc, that we do. Its scare mongering to say that modern incinerators are a serious public health issue, ask the people of Copenhagen, and many other european cities.
I agree with you on many points, I abhore GATS, and the idea of privatisation of public services.
Keep up the struggle, but I reckon that it will take a lot more than a campaign against the bintax to radically change society, and this is the problem, in my humble rustic opinion.

by conor (wsm personal capacity) Thu May 29, 2003 14:14

"country dweller: why is it that people who live in the countryside or even in most of the smaller towns around ireland have to pay to get their refuse collected, while those in dublin and cork don't? and seeing as these areas produce the most waste, should they not under the polluter pays principle, hvae to pay for these collections?"

the main reason people in Dublin don't pay water Charges is because of a succesful mass campaign of non payment

We hope to achieve the same for bin charges

to split the countery from the city is the worng way to look at it

According to a 1998 report by the environmnetal Protection Agency - householders generate 1.5 % of land fill waste

- how ever PAYE tax payers pay about 80% of all taxation

- clearly a proper and fair implementation of pollutor pays would NOT ONLY mean no charges but a LARGE REDUCTION in the tax bill for workers (and small farmers) as well

(this from a quite good leaflet put out by Joe "people power" Higgins last night)

why should we pay for the mess made by large farmers and industrialists?

"country deweller : Someone has to pay for waste disposal, and it has to be those who produce it"

Well a huge fraction of it is contained in unecessary packaging so (in a sense) the people that produced it - big capitalists are passing in it on for disposal to house holders

Conor

by Phuq Hedd Thu May 29, 2003 15:23

"According to a 1998 report by the environmnetal Protection Agency - householders generate 1.5 % of land fill waste"

That seems very low. Is that report available online or do you have a specific name that I could search for it by?

by pat c Thu May 29, 2003 15:40

i think this might be it

www.hrb.ie/attachment.php?nAttId=744&doc_id=523

by Terry Thu May 29, 2003 17:31

To Country Dweller:

Here's a argument regarding recycling and incineration I already made on another forum,
but cut and pasted to here from related link. I regret anything that maybe repeated from above

I am glad you have raised this question, because you have done what the government wants
us to do, which is to pose the question as Landfill vs Incinerators. The strategy of course is
then to play up the 'benefits' of incineration and claim it is safe.

The real question is Recycling and Reduction vs Landfill and Incineration.

As you may or may not know, there are 6 incinerators planned for Ireland, the biggest will be in
Ringsend, Dublin and designed to handle 500,000 tonnes of waste, which covers half of the
city's domestic waste. The government has actually changed the law to facilitate these and
fast tracked the planning regulations to allow them to go through. The one for Duleek, near
Drogheda already has the all-clear.

The fact is recycling in this country is being setup to fail, so as to turn the public against it
and simultaneously the ground work is been prepared to make incineration look acceptable. The
way this is being achieved is by centralising all decisions on waste into government and away
from the councils and the second and perhaps most important is the complete underfunding of
any recycling infrastructure, so that it has no chance of succeeding. The government however
has set aside a large amount of capital for the construction of incinerators.

A case in point is the way, recycling of plastic goes unsupported. Wellman International who
have a factory for the past 20+ years on the Cavan/Meath border, recycle vast amounts of
PET bottle plastic from Europe. I am aware they have made numerous requests to officials in
government to send our plastic PET waste there. Alas it is largely to no avail. Yet they must be
one of the biggest recyclers of plastic in Europe!

If you think about it, what do incinerators do. They burn stuff, like paper, cardboard and
plastic. All this stuff can be recycled, although I would agree not all plastic can. Incinerators
do not obviously burn glass, metal or concrete. Yet the waste fed into incinerators, often
contains amongst the household waste, things like batteries and PVC plastic. The batteries
contributed greatly to the contamination of the left-over ash of heavy metals and the like,
while the PVC are one of the main sources of dioxins and the many other highly poisonious
organic compounds. The waste in incinerators is reduced by about a third, but it tends to be
very toxic and should never be spread over the land. This hasn't stopped the government in
the US, in the recent past, trying to reclassify what 'organic farming' is to mean, by allowing
for the spreading of sewage sludge and incinerator ash on farmland, although as far as I know,
it was luckly defeated. You can be sure they will try the same thing here.

Recycling in places like Sweden, Finland and parts of the USA, like Seattle have achieved
massive increases in recycling up in the 80% region. We are told, Irish people, culturally would
never do that. Complete spin. Galway achieved very significant increases recently, and
exceeded targets the waste consultants used by councils said we could not achieve in 15
years. Funny these same people have recommended incineration as the solution, every where
they have given advice.

So to recap, we know we can recycle: glass, metal, paper, cardboard, signficant amounts of
plastic, particularly the bulky PET drink and shampoo type bottles. Batteries can even be
recycled. Wood could be collected and used for firewood and other things. Clothes can be
partially recycled. Tyres can be recyled. Building rubble could be crushed and used to
supplement virgin aggregate from quarries and if a 1 euro tax was put on the quarry material,
this would open the market significantly for this sector. And lastly nearly all forms of organic
waste, like potatoe peels, vegetables remains and garden remains can be safely and very
effectively composted. I think you will find that whats left is a tiny fraction of the total.

Lets face it, the drive towards incineration has many paralles with the corrupt planning
practices in this country. You can be sure brown envelopes have already been passed around.
With incineration, there is profit in more waste, in collecting the waste, in burning the waste
and in disposing of the leftovers.

Checkout
http://www.zerowaste.co.nz
http://www.noincineration.com
http://gofree.indigo.ie/~ljhannon/gswasub.htm
http://www.communities-against-toxics.org.uk

Discussion site: http://www.irishbuyersunite.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=5799

by conor (wsm personal capacity) Fri May 30, 2003 11:57

Phuq Hedd Thu, May 29 2003, 2:23pm

"According to a 1998 report by the environmnetal Protection Agency - householders generate 1.5 % of land fill waste"

"That seems very low. Is that report available online or do you have a specific name that I could search for it by? "

- I just got it from the press release Joe Higgins was giving out

How ever a web search just got me
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

http://www.google.ie/search?q=cache:Ab3RrfM8PWgJ:www.epa.ie/newslett/NL71.pdf+National+Waste+database+Report+&hl=ga&ie=UTF-8

from which I get total waste for 1998 80 million tonnes

Household PLUS comercial waste is 1.8 million
(can't see a figure for just house hold)

1.8/80 mil X 100% = 2.25%

so a bit bigger then 1.6 %
but it includes comercial waste so that figure seems pretty close

(incidently agricultural waste was 64.6 million tonnes and industrial 9.1 million)

Conor

by country dweller Fri May 30, 2003 12:17

these figures can be quite misleading when talking about incineration/landfill. OK, so a certain amount of agri waste would have to be landfilled or incinerated but most agricultural waste is spread back onto the land(slurry etc.), and therefore does not contribute to the pressure on landfill. so when takes away the large vol. attributed to the agri sector, and then works out the %, they are a lot higher with regard to the percentage of waste going to landfill(or incineration)that is comprised of household waste.

by Mike Fri May 30, 2003 13:52 stepbystepfarm at shaysnet dot com

Look, maybe a bunch of us should get together a list or something devoted to this topic. But there is no point beating each other over the head with "statistics" on waste because this is a perfect case of being able to prove anything you want by choice of measure.

By tonnage? Is THAT relevant to solid waste disposal? It's a lot easier to landfill 1000 tons of glass than 50 tons of comingled waste including some potentially hazardous water soluble substances. And maybe we should be talking cubic meters in any case because landfill space goes by volume, not weight.

Comingled waste is the worst problem because ALL of it has to be treated with the same care as the most hazardous ingrediant possibly present in the mix.

Overconcentration can be a problem. That's especially true when we bring into the discussion agricultural "waste" -- which in low enough concentrations isn't waste at all. But at the same time a 1000 cow operation CAN cause a local problem.

The reality here is that IF we have our waste separated into comonents that can and should be disposed of quite differently we in effect have a whole lot less of a problem. If you have 10 "bins", 3 just glass, 3 just plastic, 3 just paper and cardboard, 1 "other" including possibly hazardous) that's VERY different than the same 10 bins comingled. Why not "per bin" charge the "mixed" but free (or minimal per bin rate) on the segregated.

And this IS perhaps the time to point something out. We need to be very careful about treating this as a "left" vrs "capitalist" problem. SIMPLY making capitalism go away is NOT going to affect how careless people are about creating "trash".