WEEE schemes react to consultation results

A number of producers of electronic goods and waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) compliance schemes have welcomed the findings of the governments consultation on changes to the UKs WEEE regime.

However, opponents of the proposals have questioned whether the government now has a strong mandate to oversee an overhaul of the current system operating in the UK.

On Friday (August 23) the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) published a summary of responses to the consultation, which appeared to show that the vast majority of respondents backed the two options favoured by the government.

Four proposed options for the future of the WEEE system were outlined in the consultation, which was launched as part of the process of bringing the requirements of the recast WEEE Directive into UK law. It was also carried out in the wake of concerns from some producers that the cost of compliance with the regulations, in their view, did not reflect the true cost of recycling.

The options are:

• Option 1: No change and continue with the current system;
• Option 2: Introduce a National Producer Compliance Scheme, instead of competition between current compliance schemes;
• Option 3: Setting targets for compliance schemes along with a compliance fee if these are not met, instead of the trading of WEEE evidence data between collection schemes, and;
• Option 4: Matching collection sites to compliance schemes.

According to BIS analysis of the responses, options 3 & 4 were identified as the preferred options while little support was given for options 1 & 2.

JTA

The Joint Trade Association (JTA), which represents producer compliance schemes such as B2B Compliance and ERP UK as well as producers including Candy, Samsung, Delonghi, Toshiba and Dell welcomed the findings of the consultation, adding that it gave the government a powerful mandate for change.

Richard Hughes, chairman of the JTA, said: We are very pleased, although not surprised, at the strong level of support for changing the WEEE system. The government now has a powerful mandate for change.

Of the options put forward by government, Option 4 obtained the most support, ranked first by 49% of respondents, and 95% of respondents gave option 3 as either their first or second choice. Conversely, 59% ranked option 1 (do nothing) as their least favoured proposal.

Both Option 3 and 4 would be a good outcome for all stakeholders. Producers support these options because they remove the must buy market for WEEE evidence which is a cause of excessive costs in the current system, and because both options introduce a clear audit trail for WEEE treatment.

Recolight

And, Nigel Harvey, chief executive of lamp compliance scheme Recolight, said that Recolight felt the responses showed a clear support for changes to the system.

He said: As members of the Joint Trade Association, we are delighted by the very strong support for the changes to the household WEEE system, to make it fairer for all stakeholders. We were pleased that 49% of respondents put Option 4 as their first choice, and that 95% of respondents put option 3 as their first or second choice.

I am particularly pleased that 84% of respondents supported the governments proposal to include LED and Gas Discharge Lamps in the same category. This proposal will benefit the UK, by avoiding the risk of an unfounded (orphan) fluorescent lamp waste stream.”

Meanwhile, Dr Philip Morton, chief executive of compliance scheme REPIC, also welcomed the findings of the consultation.

He said: Repic welcomes the overwhelming multi-stakeholder support for positive change that is evident from the summary of responses to the WEEE consultation, published by BIS last week. The responses make it clear that option 1, the status quo is not sustainable.

It is fantastic to see so much alignment between the various stakeholders and their support for options 3 and 4. It is particularly pleasing to note that producers and compliance schemes representing thousands of producers with a combined obligation of over 90 per cent of the WEEE voted for change, with the next largest set of responses in support of change coming from local authorities and their representative organisations.

The local authorities collection network is a vital part of the system and we understand and respect the local authorities perspective. Options 3 and 4 give local authorities freedom of choice to deal with WEEE themselves, should they wish to benefit, for example, from any WEEE with a positive value. At the same time, these options for change both embed a guarantee that any WEEE local authorities do not wish to deal with will be collected free of charge, regardless of location or targets. This means they have the chance to make money and never face a cost.

We look forward to working with BIS and all stakeholders to ensure a smooth and seamless transition to a new, more equitable system beginning in 2014.

Electrolink

However, Barry Van Danzig, chief executive of compliance scheme Electrolink, who considers the current system works effectively for industry and local authorities, questioned the assertion by the JTA that the results gave BIS a strong mandate for change.

Mr Van Danzig reasoned that the producers who responded only made up around 2% of those obligated under the WEEE regulations in the UK.

He said: I find it difficult to believe that there is a mandate for change. There are 5,000 obligated companies in the UK of which only 110 – 2% – responded. Of these 39 were from REPIC and 39 from Recolight. That is around 30% of each of their total members responding, so 70% of them didnt respond at all.

These total 75% of all the responses going to the government and have caused BIS and the JTA to claim that they have a mandate for change. We believe that the proposals they are asking for are likely to put the cost of recycling up because local authorities are aware that they will be subsidising this and they are unlikely to want to continue to do that.