Waste management firms Biffa and Veolia ES have welcomed the result of the Judicial Review which will allow commingled recycling collections to continue in England and Wales.
In a ruling yesterday, Mr Justice Hickinbottom dismissed the case against the government brought by six members of the Campaign for Real Recycling (CRR) who said that Defra had wrongly transposed the terms of the revised Waste Framework Directive in allowing commingled collections.
CRR members pursuing the case against the government include Ardagh Glass, DS Smith Paper, Novelis UK, Palm Recycling, Smurfit Kappa and UK Recyclate.
During the hearing last week, the claimants had argued that waste management firms were keen to preserve a regime where paper, glass, plastic and metals are collected commingled at the kerbside and separated at materials recycling facilities (MRFs) to financial gain of the waste companies (see letsrecycle.com story).
But, yesterdays ruling will allow councils and waste contractors to continue to employ commingled collections unless separate collections are necessary to meet the quality standards of the relevant recycling sectors and are technically, environmentally and economically practicable.
Biffa
Responding to the ruling, Pete Dickson development director of municipal services firm Biffa, which runs a number of local authority waste collection contracts, said that the outcome of the Review supports the need to maximise the collection of recyclables.
He said: We are pleased that common sense has prevailed, and that the legal interpretation appears to support the spirit of the EU regulations. We now hope that local councils will be able to confidently face the challenge of improving their recycling services by whatever method is best for them.
Producing maximum quantities of recyclable materials needs to be our aim as an industry, whatever the collection and sorting system employed, and I am delighted to hear that the outcome of the Review supports this.
Every day the public raises its concerns about the growing number of bins outside their homes. If the Judicial Review had gone the other way who knows how many bins we’d see outside homes across the counrty.
Estell Brachlianoff, chief executive, Veolia ES
Support for the ruling also came from Estelle Brachlianoff, chief executive of Veolia Environmental Services, who added that a ruling against the government would have been costly for local authorities.
She said: Every day the public raises its concerns about the growing number of bins outside their homes. If the Judicial Review had gone the other way who knows how many bins wed see outside homes across the country. Its great to see that common sense has prevailed and taxpayers money will not be wasted unnecessarily.
The decision to retain commingled recycling is a win-win-win. Recycling rates will continue to go as people prefer this method, local authorities will retain the right to choose how their waste is collected and there will be a reduced risk of accidents from kerbside sorting.
Recycling Association
Meanwhile, the Recycling Association, the trade body for waste paper processors also welcomed the ruling, adding that commingled collections help to increase public participation in recycling.
Speaking yesterday, Dr Simon Ellin, the Associations chief executive, said: The Recycling Association has always supported the concept of MRFs providing they produce a recyclate that is of sufficient quality to support a range of uses. With that in mind, we wholly support todays ruling.
MRFs using commingled feedstock are a superb way of increasing public participation, capturing feedstock and thus increasing recycling rates, providing they produce a quality recyclate. That said, we wholly support source separation schemes too, if they successfully increase recycling rates whilst producing a quality output.
Dr Ellin added that, had the decision over collection systems been taken out of the hands of local authorities it is likely to have caused uncertainty for waste contractors. He also suggested that market forces were the best means of ensuring quality.
Claimants
In the wake of yesterdays ruling, Mal Williams chair of the CRR suggested that the group may launch an appeal into the verdict, but it is not yet known if this will go ahead.
And, in a statement released today, Hilary Harrison, partner at Anthony Collins Solicitors, which represents the claimants, said: Our clients sought a judicial review because it felt that the Waste (Amendments) Regulations 2012 did not accurately represent the EU Waste Framework Directive in UK law and was negatively affecting the quality of recycled material from UK households.
The Judge presiding over the case has ruled in favour of Defra and the Welsh Ministers, with the decision that the correct transposition of EU law allows for commingled collection.
The purpose of this judicial review was to provide clarity for local authorities across the UK in regard to current recycling processes. It is essential that recycling be kept at the top of the local government agenda in order to ensure that as much waste material as possible is correctly processed.
Despite the ruling, our client still feels that commingling is not the most efficient or effective method of collecting waste, and at this stage is considering appropriate next actions.
Register for free to comment