The idea of variable charging is believed to be one that is being looked at by the PIU in a paper on charging options because of the recognition that extra funding is needed for waste management and that charging could help encourage waste minimisation and recycling. However, the PIU will not finalise its proposals until this autumn and is still consulting on many aspects of its review of the waste strategy.
The Guardian report, which is thought to be based on leaked-PIU papers, claims that the new charging scheme – which could be up to 1 a sack or 5 a month – is being backed by the Treasury. “It would run alongside a free doorstep service to encourage people to recycle papers, cans, bottles and plastics in order to avoid paying the new bills.”
Pilot projects to test how a charging scheme would work will be recommended by the PIU, according to the newspaper. It says that: “The detail of how the charging scheme will work and how it will be implemented is still being discussed because it is such a sensitive issue for voters. However the Treasury would like to launch a series of pilot schemes by local authorities – preferably of all political colours – to experiment with different systems.
Free sacks
“The most likely system would be a specific charge for each sack of rubbish – possibly allowing each household one or two free sacks a week – and levying a charge of up to 1 on each extra sack. This would provide an incentive for people to recycle or compost more of their kitchen waste,” claims the Guardian.
ESA backs direct charging
The Environmental Services Association – which represents waste management companies – also entered the charging debate today with a report produced for it by consultants Ernst & Young covering direct charging. The Association has long argued that the public should pay for services they need for the waste they generate.
“If European average levels of recovery of value from waste are to be
achieved, spending on the municipal waste stream needs at least to double,” commented Dirk Hazell, ESA's chief executive.
“To improve recycling rates it is essential to start to apply to
householders the “polluter pays” principle which already broadly applies to
business. There are different models of direct and variable charging which
could be applied, including models which will not encourage flytipping.
The Ernst & Young paper has now been considered by ESA's board of directors and we commend it as a positive contribution to public debate about householders, local authorities and ESA's members working together to modernise the UK's management of household waste,” he concluded.
Register for free to comment