Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (26 November) . . Page.. 4762 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

When the Irish Government introduced a levy of 25 cents on each plastic bag sold (the "PlasTax"), their Environment Minister explained that he didn't want shoppers to pay the levy. He wanted people to avoid it by bringing their own bags to the shops. It worked overnight.

A year after the levy had been introduced, Ireland was using 90 per cent less plastic check-out bags. To commemorate the occasion, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Mr Martin Cullen, recalled the reasons why the Irish Government had initiated the levy.

"The environmental levy on plastic bags, which was introduced this time last year, has had a dramatic impact on our consumption of plastic bags and on the problem of visual litter,"he said. "Quite apart from the immediate objective of cutting down our consumption of disposable plastic bags, it has been very effective in raising awareness of waste management issues and the part each one of us can play in reducing the amount of waste that we produce."

In their section on what would happen if the success of the Irish levy was replicated in Australia, they point out:

Australia currently uses 6.9 billion plastic check-out bags every year. If we reduce that by 90 per cent like the Irish have done, then we would only be using 690 million plastic check-out bags every year. That's a reduction of over 6.2 billion plastic check-out bags every year.

A 25 cent levy charged on these 690 million plastic bags would raise $172.5 million a year towards environmental causes. Such monies could go towards the fixing up of Australia's salinity problems or providing free reusable shopping bags for every household etc.

I would also like to quote what has been said by Labor members of the committee. Interestingly, the Labor members, Senator Wong and Canberra's Senator Lundy, made additional comments, and I will read some of them:

Labor members of the Committee consider the evidence presented to the Committee demonstrates the urgent need for mandatory measures to minimise plastic bag usage in Australia. However, given the technical impediments to the bills under inquiry and the Government's opposition to mandatory measures, the passage of these bills will be futile.

To be effective, the bills under inquiry require the introduction of a third bill, imposing the proposed levy. Due to constitutional and other constraints, only the Government can introduce a bill imposing such a levy. The Government has indicated it does not support such legislation and will not introduce such a bill. Without legislation imposing the levy, the bills under inquiry become ineffective, and are essentially reduced to an exercise in hypothetical legislating.

Accordingly, we endorse the majority report's recommendation that these bills not be agreed to, albeit on somewhat different grounds.

They went on to say:

Labor members note the positive steps taken by various retailers and communities to address the problem of plastic bag usage. In particular, the ban on plastic bags in

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .