CRR reiterates commitment to judicial review plans

The Campaign for Real Recycling has reiterated its commitment to launch a legal challenge over Defras stance on commingling recyclables, claiming that councils should see any move to require them to kerbside sort as an opportunity rather than a threat.

And, the group has also sought to dispel claims made by supporters of the governments position over the cost of moving away from commingled collections and the impact it would have on the UKs recycling rates.

Speaking to letsrecycle.com, CRR coordinator Andy Moore said there was no change of plan from the groups original intention to launch a judicial review to reverse Defras decision to allow commingling to count towards the separate collection of recycling required under the revised Waste Framework Directive (rWFD).

Mr Moore explained that the CRR was still quizzing the evidence base Defra has used to reach its position, which was outlined in draft regulations for implementing the rWFD published last month (see letsrecycle.com story).

He said it was too early to say exactly when any legal action would be formally launched, adding: Were still at the stage of legal opinions. But, as I understand the process we cant take it before a judge before it becomes law. It can take a while.

Cost

Reacting to comments made in support of Defras stance by waste management companies and paper industry figures (see letsrecycle.com story), the Campaign has pointed to studies by WRAP and the Welsh Assembly Government which, it says, show that kerbside sort makes greater economic sense.

In particular, the CRR claims that the capital costs of changing to kerbside sort are very modest compared to those for buying compactor vehicles for commingling and building new materials recycling facilities for MRFs.

Mal Williams, chair of the campaign, said: Collection contractors prioritising quality should easily be able to factor such small capital outlay into a per household or tonnage price to the local authority.

We urge local authorities to look again at the figures. They really should perceive a correct implementation of the rWFD as an opportunity rather than a threat.

It is understood that the campaigns arguments over collection cost are backed up by figures provided by May Gurney, which has secured a number of source-separation collection contracts since taking over community recycling group ECT in June 2008 (see letsrecycle.com story).

The group has also highlighted Friends of the Earth research published in September 2010 about the job creation potential within the recycling sector (see letsrecycle.com story), which it claims further backs up its arguments.

Describing claims that its legal action would set back UK recycling as nonsense, Mr Williams said a move to only allow source-separated collections would set a course for higher diversion and more green jobs from collection and UK reprocessing.