Page 5815 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 7 December 2010

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


400 million fewer bags have gone to landfill as a result of the ban. In terms of a verifiable impact on a reduction in waste to landfill, it is significant—400 million bags fewer going to the landfill.

What is perhaps more interesting are the changes that have occurred in relation to people’s behaviour. The South Australian government has extensively surveyed South Australians before, during and after the ban has taken place. Indeed, three detailed surveys have been undertaken by the University of South Australia.

Most usefully, those surveys have found significant behaviour change. Overall, in the most recent survey conducted by the University of South Australia, more than nine in 10 respondents claimed to take their own bags shopping compared to approximately six in 10 of all respondents who responded in phase 1 of the survey. According to the University of South Australia, this shows a significant change in behaviour. Of course, behaviour change is one of the most important considerations in relation to this legislation. So does it work in reducing waste to landfill? Yes, it does. Does it change behaviour? Undoubtedly, and there are clear scientific surveys to back this up.

It is worth highlighting to members, of course, that the legislation being introduced here in the territory mirrors the provisions in South Australia. What is the harm that is being addressed? The harm is harm to our environment. There is no doubt that the use of single-use plastic shopping bags does cause harm to the environment. It is worth highlighting that often this harm is characterised as harm to marine life.

There is no doubt that there is significant harm to marine life. Extensive studies now show the massive amount of plastic material circulating in our oceans and the harm that that does to many marine animals. But the harm is not restricted solely to the marine environment. Indeed, the harm also occurs on land. Plastic bags, according to one website, can block drains and trap birds. They also kill livestock. There is clear evidence that livestock ingest plastic bags. It kills them and it creates significant economic harm for the owners of those animals.

It is also worth highlighting, of course, that plastic bags are a significant litter problem. Indeed, of all the waste escaping from landfills it is estimated that 47 per cent of it is plastic shopping bags. Because of its lightweight nature, it is simply blown away. One only has to drive down Mugga Lane past the ACT landfill to see this in action. Plastic shopping bags festoon the fencing around that facility. But what do Canberrans think about reducing plastic bag use? Fifty-nine per cent of Canberrans believe that plastic bags are a problem. That is based on the telephone survey results undertaken by my department last year. Fifty-eight per cent of Canberrans support some form of restrictive action, either a levy or a ban.

Mr Seselja: How many want a ban?

MR CORBELL: A clear majority of Canberrans surveyed support restrictive action by government.

Mr Seselja: He doesn’t want to talk about how many want a ban. How many want a ban?


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