Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2011 Week 14 Hansard (Thursday, 8 December 2011) . . Page.. 6070 ..


(5) What data that underpinned concerns about smells and pests associated with a third organic bin as described in the draft Waste Strategy (p 17).

Mr Corbell: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) The third bin collection service costs used in the second URS & Eco Waste report were estimated from ACT Government contract costs associated with existing collection services.

(2) The ACT has relatively low household waste collection costs ($/household/year) due to the ACT being much larger than most Australian councils and having excellent road networks. Thus, using URS or Eco Waste in-house data or public domain data could have unfairly disadvantaged a third-bin collection service.

(3) Cost Benefit Analysis generally involves varied assumptions, estimates and forward predictions. The results were tested via extensive sensitivity analysis and a sensitivity analysis associated with costs was included. The full results, including sensitivity analysis were released 8 December 2010.

(4) The draft waste strategy stated that “some people may choose not to sort food waste”. Participation rates are a key issue for all organic waste collection services that have been implemented in Australia and globally. Hyder has been contracted to review participation rates in organic waste collection systems in Australia and internationally as well the ACT’s own 2001 trial in Chifley.

(5) Experience of other Australian and international jurisdictions indicate that odour and flies (especially outdoors) and cockroaches or vermin (especially indoors) are key issues that must be managed in any food waste collection service. The increasing prevalence of nappies, that cannot be accepted into the organic bin can be a source of odour nuisance. If the relevant jurisdiction seeks to manage the high costs of these services by using either fortnightly collection for the organics bin or the residual-waste bin these odour issues may be particularly prevalent.


Waste—charity discounts(Question No 1906)

Ms Le Couteur asked the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, upon notice, on 27 October 2011:

In relation to charities that have access to landfill at a discount rate (a) what organisations are able to dump at a discount rate, (b) what is the discount rate, (c) is there a restriction on the type of goods that can be dumped, (d) can charities dump electronic waste, (e) can the tip recycling shop, Tiny’s, dump waste at a discount rate, (f) what volume of waste is dumped by charities each year and (f) can charities dump at both Mitchell and Mugga Lane.

Mr Corbell: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:

(1) (a) No charities have access to landfill at discount rates.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video