Mr Rogerson said during a debate on the policy package that he was “not yet convinced” that the proposed targets – including that for Member States to recycle or reuse 70% or municipal waste by 2030 – would boost jobs and growth, while several other member suggested the targets were too ambitious.
This led to outgoing European Commissioner for the Environment, Janez Potocnik – in his final meeting in the role – to comment after the debate that he “was obviously not convincing enough” in setting out his argument in favour of the policy package, despite describing food waste as an “immoral and economic disaster”.
The purpose of the ‘orientation debate’ was to see where each Member State currently stands on the proposed legislative package – adopted by the European Commission in July 2014 (see letsrecycle.com story) – in order to provide guidance for further discussions within the European Council.
Having been adopted by the Commission, the resource efficiency proposals have passed to the European Council of Ministers and will then go to the European Parliament for consideration by politicians.
Debate
Opening the Environment Council debate, Mr Potocnik outlined his arguments in favour of the resource efficiency proposals, which also include a proposed ban on sending recyclable materials such as plastics, paper, metals, glass and biodegradable waste to landfill by 2025, as well as phasing out landfilling of waste by 2030. Higher packaging targets are also proposed.
Mr Potocnik said: “Waste is at the centre of this package because as we move towards a circular economy, we will move towards zero waste. It simply does not make sense to continue burying waste.”
He explained that the targets were realistic and achievable and set out the economic arguments, including the assertion that the package would directly create 600,000 additional jobs.
Concluding, Mr Potocnik said he had “spent much of my time explaining the economic arguments” but that fulfilling the proposals would cut “millions of tonnes” of greenhouse gases.
He said: “All of those things do matter and yes, this our prime responsibility and I think it is important that we keep these things in mind too.”
‘Not convinced’
During the debate, some Member States – including Germany – agreed with the level of ambition and noted their own progress towards meeting the targets in the package.
However, many Member States expressed concern that the targets for waste reduction and reuse were too demanding or optimistic, and Ireland felt that the 70% target for recycling was “unrealistic”.
Setting out the UK position during the debate, Defra waste and recycling minister Dan Rogerson said that he “supports the core aims of the proposals and the objective to boost key jobs” and that “the UK is still committed to greater resource efficiency”.
However, he said there was still “insufficient evidence to assess the cost of the proposals” and that the UK “cannot commit to anything” until more detailed work is carried out on how the package might impact on the UK economy.
He said that he was “not yet convinced” that the proposed targets would help to boost UK jobs, growth and resource efficiency, arguing that “high targets may promote quantity over quality” in regards to recycling, with the UK waste industry increasingly seeking higher quality materials.
And, he was keen to “make sure that recycling targets do not undermine” reuse and prevention objectives, adding that “we should not change the definitions and measurement methods of current targets”.
Elsewhere, Mr Rogerson suggested that proposed minimum requirements for producer responsibility could also “undermine” the markets.
Mr Rogerson said: “Firstly, lets give us enough time to allow the market to adapt to current targets.”
Subscribe for free