Europe's eco-taxes levied on rubbish disposal
Households in Fingal County, an Irish province with 200,000 inhabitants, received green bins to dispose of recyclable waste in 2002. The county started charging a collection fee on the traditional "black" bins and no fee was charged on the green bins...
Households in Fingal County, an Irish province with 200,000 inhabitants, received green bins to dispose of recyclable waste in 2002. The county started charging a collection fee on the traditional "black" bins and no fee was charged on the green bins used for recyclable waste.
In Dilbeek, a Belgian city with a population of 38,000, a waste fee is charged when customers buy garbage bags. The rate charged varies from €0.84 to €1.12 depending on the volume of the bag.
A look at cost recovery schemes for waste collection in a number of European cities reveals that while different methods of applying the eco-tax exist, there is also a fundamental difference in the way it has been adopted in the European cities and the way it is being proposed in Malta.
While foreign schemes recover the cost of waste collection and processing when an object is thrown away, Maltese consumers will be paying eco-tax the moment they buy an item, possibly leaving consumers with hardly any incentive to generate less waste.
Eleven years ago the Danish town of Bogense introduced a scheme based on the weight of rubbish generated. According to this system, a fixed yearly fee of E137 is paid for five kilos of residual waste every 14 days and five kilos of paper, glass and cardboard every month. Above the five-kilo capping, a fee of €0.5 applies for each kilo of waste.
Other European regions, such as the German province of Wiesbaden, created a system of charging per container of waste.
A 120-litre rubbish bin collected weekly costs households about €143 yearly. The charges increase with larger containers of waste but no charge is levied for "Green Dot" items that are recollected by the private sector.
According to the scheme adopted in Koerich and Kopstal (Luxembourg) in 1995, waste is charged according to whether it is mixed or whether it is properly separated at source, based on whether the waste is recyclable or not and even to what extent it can be recycled.
While people disposing of metal scrap pay almost €20, for example, compostable waste only costs €0.09 to be thrown away. Refrigerators cost €47.
Though the same principle of cost recovery applies in Malta, these systems clearly provide for greater incentives to "reward" those who generate less waste.
The local tax, as proposed, is to be charged on containers ranging from plastic and glass bottles and cans for beer, wine and non-alcoholic drinks to white goods and electronic products including telephones.
For example, on a packet of four small batteries the charge will be 10c per battery. For a refrigerator or a microwave oven, for instance, consumers will have to pay an extra Lm15 the moment they buy the item.
Asked if the government had looked at how other European countries recovered costs for waste collection, the Ministry for Rural Affairs and the Environment said the government devised "what it thought most fit for Malta after looking at various alternatives. But the system is still open to changes, even after the law is introduced," the ministry said.
The government had already stated that if producers and importers took it upon themselves to recollect and recycle the products they sold, the government was prepared to lift the eco-tax on specific items.
Announced during then Finance Minister John Dalli's budget speech last November, the new law on eco "contribution" has stirred up a hornet's nest in recent days.
The Chamber of Small and Medium Enterprises, GRTU, said that as proposed by the government, the tax was one of the heaviest ever imposed. The Federation of Industry complained about the 0.84 per cent rise in the retail price index, equivalent to a weekly 54c rise in the cost of living adjustment.
The trade unions said the measure would impair the purchasing power of workers, a situation that could not be tolerated. The tax, they argued, was not really intended to improve the environment but was simply another measure to generate government revenue.
The Consumers' Association also gave its thumbs down to the Bill. It said an eco-tax should have been introduced after an education campaign that encouraged consumers to use eco-friendly products.