Consultation on Revising the Management Strategy

Introduction

is a collaborative legal public sector entity embracing eleven Councils located along the Eastern Region of Northern Ireland which covers 25% of the land base, populated by approximately 57% of the national population and accounts for approximately 54% of the national municipal waste ( as currently defined) arisings.

The establishment of arc21 together with its functionality is enshrined in legislation with the original provision being The Local Government (Constituting a Joint Committee a Body Corporate) Order (NI) 2004.

In essence, it is primarily responsible for activities associated with the production, ongoing development and implementation of a Plan within the Eastern Region Area.

The eleven constituent Councils of arc21 are Borough Council, Borough Council, Borough Council, City Council, Borough Council, Borough Council, , Borough Council, , Borough Council and North Down Borough Council.

Report

arc21 welcomes the opportunity to respond to this consultation.

Overview

The following is an overview of the arc21 comments arising from the draft Strategy document.

Approach to the Strategy

The aspirations of the Strategy are moving in the right direction, but more focus is needed on the development of a more holistic approach. It is critical that government sets the framework, and leads the process for Northern Ireland, within the UK, and with Republic of Ireland and Europe, rather than waiting for a lead from other bodies such as Defra. It is also critical that the department takes a holistic view of the infrastructure requirements, taking the (including ) into account and to prepare for the expected 2025

1 ban. A long-term strategic view is required, with the necessary funding made available, to provide an adequate lead-in time to 2025.

As indicated above, the strategy is taking Northern Ireland in the right direction as portrayed in the prime aspiration of a strategic shift from resource management to resource efficiency. However the strategy lacks sufficient tangible measures and proposals to suggest that an adequate shift is likely to be achieved in the future. The strategy contains a number of commitments to consult on a variety of aspects but lacks an indication of meaningful detail in this respect. Even allowing for compliance with European Directives, it is suggested that a move towards resource efficiency should be marked with a move away from applying weight based targets to one which more adequately reflects a life cycle approach perhaps entailing carbon accounting.

Evidence-based Policy

There is a pressing need in Northern Ireland to develop a robust evidence base for our waste policies, including cost/benefit analysis for any decisions. Attention must be paid to the balance between inputs and outputs. This should be undertaken with due regard to adopting an approach which, as indicated above, more adequately reflects a life cycle approach.

This Strategy represents the prime document which should enable Northern Ireland to continue towards more sustainably and efficiently utilising its waste material as a resource. The framework outlined in the document is articulated in a more local perspective through the production of Waste Management Plans by Councils through the Waste Management Groups. Consequently it is important that the Strategy clearly outlines the evidence to enable the Waste Management Plans to properly articulate the local translation of policies etc in a consistent and compatible way.

As an example, there are no assumptions made in the Strategy in relation to waste growth, which will have a knock on impact on the revision of waste management plans; neither are any assumptions made in relation to export of waste. It is important that all three plans are able to work from the same basic and evidenced baseline.

Finance

arc21 consider that the Strategy must be adequately financed in the context of policy compliance at a European, National and Local level. We consider that it is important that the focus on infrastructure is not constrained to Residual waste landfill diversion targets at 2020 and that amore long-term approach to supporting the policy direction of travel is taken particularly in the context of subvention.

Timing

It is unfortunate and regrettable that the review has not been able to be undertaken before now. The timing of this Strategy revision, whilst required in legislation, is problematic in relation to the revision of waste management plans and the local government reform timetable. The inclusion of unresolved policy actions has exacerbated this issue.

2 However, arc21 remain committed to liaise with the department to address this difficulty and would urge the department to work with the Waste Management Groups in a true partnership approach.

Prevention/reduction v recycling

The challenges between the need to improve waste prevention/reduction and the impact this will have on weight-based targets needs to be carefully considered. The overall carbon impact of proposed policy instruments must be fully taken into account, and an agreed framework clarified for making policy decisions.

Infrastructure Development

Moving towards resource efficiency will necessitate infrastructure development including regionally significant facilities. The Strategy is light on the measures that will be taken by government to encourage this. The Strategy only appears to consider support for the minimum needed for Northern Ireland to meet European Landfill Diversion requirements.

This approach is not compatible with resource efficiency or other overarching statutory obligations and policies. arc21 would contend that the final strategy should include proposals which clearly demonstrate support for infrastructure development which will contribute to such.

Targets

If the department is intent on applying a 60% target for Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste by 2020 then the proposed application and composition of this target must be clarified as a matter of urgency and priority. Given such a target is much more onerous than required in the European Directive, it is considered reasonable that Government should also be prepared to provide resources to cover or support the additional cost implications of introducing such a target.

Ambiguity

Any ambiguities in evidence within the document, for example in relation to separate collection, should be addressed as a matter of priority and urgency and be reflected in the final publication.

Communications

Further work must be done to improve communication of key messages, to improve buy-in from the public and from government departments. Consideration must be given to the application of Re:Think waste monies, and there must be work done across government to integrate front-facing waste and resource policy between departments.

3 Integration of waste streams

Although the draft Strategy talks about integration of waste streams, there seems to be little within the document in relation to outcome-focused action on this issue. arc21 is concerned by the department’s current over-reliance on the marketplace in this regard.

Consideration must be given to the possibilities in relation to the integration of different waste streams in Northern Ireland. This could include the introduction of measures to require the packaging and retail industry to tangibly support council collection and disposal infrastructure and services, and to facilitate and promote a greater level of collaboration between producers, retailers and collection/disposal authorities in Northern Ireland.

Separate collection

As previously indicated on a number of occasions, arc21 would urge the department to expedite the production of the necessary guidance etc to provide sufficient clarity in respect of the associated obligations around this issue. This relates in particular to establishing what is “technically, environmentally and economically practicable” , “necessary quality standards for the relevant recycling standard” and a Code of Practice for MRF Operators. The longer it takes to clarify such matters the greater the risk of litigious action against councils. . Delivery and Governance

arc21 would suggest a more effective governance monitoring model would be that similar to the independent Waste Advisory Board which operated during the first National Waste Strategy .

Review of Public Administration

It may be timely in the context of Local Government Reform to visit the debate on Waste Disposal Authority Models.

Compliance with Waste Regulations 2011

The department must satisfy itself that the final published Strategy revision complies with the relevant obligations laid down in regulation 5 of the Waste Regulations 2011. The department may wish to consider if the strategy sufficiently covers the objectives outlined in Schedule 3, Part1, sections 2(2) and 4.

In addition, there is concern that the matters laid out in Part 2 are inadequately addressed, and that there are some omissions from the Strategy as a result of this. Addressing such would benefit the development of the Waste Management Plans.

4 Detailed Comments

Nowithstanding the above overview, arc21 would comment further as follows;

PART 1 - SETTING THE SCENE

Key Strategic Drivers

The key strategic drivers of resource efficiency, sustainable development, climate change, the green economy and health and well-being are appropriate in the context of the draft revised strategy are broadly supported. However, arc21 would contend that it is appropriate to embed some form of carbon metrics within the Strategy.

Resource Efficiency

The shift towards this aspiration is commendable but the Strategy should more adequately reflect this. arc21 would suggest that complete reliance on only weight based targets is not fully compatible with such an aspiration or with adopting a life cycle analysis approach. The strategy would benefit from incorporating carbon metrics as a key performance indicator. Notwithstanding the above paragraph above and regardless of the approach adopted it will be important to recognise the significant contribution that waste prevention activities make and a methodology for doing so requires to be developed.

Sustainable Development

Local Government has worked extremely closely with OFMDFM in developing the NI Sustainable Development Strategy, associated implementation plan, and forthcoming guidance.

The NI Waste Management Strategy must be fundamentally linked to the NI Sustainable Development Strategy and its strategic objectives. It is acknowledged that this revised Waste Strategy is complementary and highlighted the contribution that recycling more waste and recovering energy from it can make to reduce carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions.

arc21 notes the Strategy acknowledges that applying the proximity principle when developing treatment or disposal facilities in order to minimise the environmental impacts of waste transport is featured. The strategy should reinforce this throughout and in particular should contain proposals to support the development of significant infrastructure which will contribute to such.

Climate Change

It is noted that the management of waste contributes directly to climate change through emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) from landfill sites and energy use, and overall, contribute to approximately 3% of the UK’s GHG emissions. Although the draft revised Strategy complements current work underway to address the challenges posed by climate change and will undoubtedly be linked to any forthcoming NI Climate change Bill (the

5 requirements of which should be evidence based), it is also noted that there are other drivers for landfill diversion, not least landfill tax.

The Green Economy

arc21 believe that local government has a vital role to play in creating opportunities and supporting local economies, and would very much view council waste management work as part of a supply chain for markets that are only beginning to develop.

Council economic development work, including creation of a number of environmental resource centres, forms part of a local integrated approach to the green economy, which also includes delivery of resource efficiency support for businesses through projects such as the BITES programme and the STEM project.

arc21 would encourage more cross-governmental and integrated working, particularly between DOE, DETI, InvestNI and councils to maximise and ensure targeted use of available resources.

Health and Social Well-being

arc21 welcomes the inclusion of health and well-being as one of the strategic drivers identified in the draft revised Strategy. It is clear that a more resource efficient approach, including diversion from landfill, can contribute to health and well-being, through prevention of environmental pollution and contamination.

The encouragement of local community recycling activities can assist in developing community cohesion, and through more integrated working with social enterprises, can assist in tackling poverty and social deprivation.

arc21 would encourage the department to move further in its thinking on this area, and to consider how the implementation of the waste strategy will fit into the forthcoming council- led community planning process, and also, to give consideration as to the potential impacts for and disposal arising from the proposals outlined by DHSSPSNI in the ‘Transforming Your Care’ document – e.g. increased clinical waste arisings from individual households.

Overarching Principles

The Waste Hierarchy

arc21 agrees that the Waste Hierarchy should be an overarching principle of the NI Waste Management Strategy, as a cornerstone of EU waste policy and legislation, designed to minimise adverse environmental effects from waste and to increase resource efficiency in waste management and policy. It is important that the policy instruments developed to implement the strategy are designed to enable the requirements of this Waste Hierarchy to be met.

6 Life Cycle Approach

arc21 is supportive of the Life Cycle Approach as an overarching principle of the Strategy however, for some waste streams it may be necessary to depart from the waste hierarchy, to ensure the best overall outcome is achieved through ‘life cycle’ thinking.

However, the Strategy needs to more adequately reflect this and moving away from simply relying on weight based targets would help to redress this.

Polluter Pays Principle

arc21 supports the inclusion of the Polluter Pays Principle as an overarching principle of the Waste Strategy. We would be particularly keen to ensure that the published Strategy and its implementation further develops requirements, including statutory requirements, for the commercial and industrial sector, for example, requiring producers to make annual returns (commercial/ industrial sector/ waste operators/ retailers).

Previously considerable attention has been paid to Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste and it is appropriate for more attention to be given to waste from the other sectors. Measures to reliably quantify waste from the commercial and industrial sector are overdue and addressing this should be closely followed by the introduction of appropriate targets.

arc21 is of the view that more could be done to prevent waste in the retail sector in particular, and this could limit the impact of and directly influence householder behaviour. Measures to require the packaging and retail industry to tangibly support council collection and disposal infrastructure and services, and to facilitate and promote a greater level of collaboration between producers, retailers and collection/disposal authorities in Northern Ireland should be introduced.

Proximity Principle

It is appropriate for the Strategy to acknowledge this as an appropriate overarching principle. However, the strategy does not make reference to the principle of self sufficiency with these two principles often linked together.

There is a rationale behind consideration, in appropriate circumstances, being given to an all island approach to more sustainable and efficient means of managing waste as a resource in addition to the ability to work on an UK basis.

Integration of Waste Streams

arc21 supports the integration of waste streams as an overarching principle, but believe the Strategy lacks adequate proposals to demonstrate meaningful conviction to encourage the development of such.

As an example and as previously indicated, arc21 believe there is scope for the department to introduction of measures to require the packaging and retail industry to tangibly support council collection and disposal infrastructure and services, and to facilitate and promote a

7 greater level of collaboration between producers, retailers and collection/disposal authorities in Northern Ireland.

Another example would be to include proposals that go beyond the strategy commitment to maintaining close liaison with DARD and NI Water so that any opportunities for utilising feedstock from the municipal waste stream can be exploited. arc21 would suggest that a scheme, including financial support, could be developed which would encourage integration between government departments, agencies and councils.

The strategy is very light in its consideration of some significant waste streams which are subject to the waste planning requirements of the waste framework directive e.g. agricultural waste, clinical waste, , mining and quarry waste etc. arc21 would suggest that the Strategy should address these waste streams more comprehensively and this should include proposals to encourage a greater degree of integration with other waste streams.

Other Overarching Considerations

Joined-Up Government /Government leading by example

arc21 strongly supports the intent to strengthen integration of government work in relation to resource efficiency. In addition to the comments above, at ‘Integration of Waste Streams’ it is particularly highlighted that other issues arising from government policy will have an impact on waste management in Northern Ireland and that DOE should be proactive in ensuring governmental silos are overcome.

A current example is the proposal within the DHSSPSNI ‘Transforming Your Care’ proposals to promote care of the elderly and infirm at home, rather than in care homes, which will increase the amount of clinical waste that councils are required to manage.

The link to sustainable development noted in the draft Strategy is welcomed, as are the links noted in relation to relevant cross departmental working groups.

In relation to government leading by example, arc21 would note that although resource efficiency in internal, back office services is necessary and should undoubtedly continue, it is of limited impact in demonstrating government commitment to resource efficiency in comparison to that which can and must be demonstrated through front-facing public services, policy, strategy, procurement and delivery, across government.

For example, there is potential within this revised Strategy, to move towards a requirement for all public facing public sector organisations, such as councils, schools, hospitals, NI Housing Executive, Social Services benefits offices, to openly and transparently set appropriate targets and actions on reducing waste, as role models for local residents and businesses.

All-island Approach

arc21 supports closer cross-border governmental working and would suggest that benefit could be derived from considering the direct involvement of local government at appropriate junctures in such working. 8 Co-operation on enforcement activities to combat and fuel laundering is particularly encouraged.

Better Regulation

arc21 notes the inclusion of Better Regulation as an overarching principle. However, we would highlight concern in relation to resourcing of NIEA, particularly for enforcement work. It is vital that the NIEA are adequately resourced and make appropriate use of the resources available to undertake regulatory work.

Although the intent of Better Regulation is to reduce the amount of ‘red tape’ for businesses, arc21 would note that to ensure the aims of this Strategy can be met, and targets attained, it is likely to be necessary to apply statutory requirements on businesses as outlined previously. Further reference is made to Better Regulation issues later in this response.

Funding

The extent and mechanism of providing funding support will send a clear and unambiguous signal as to the department’s and central government’s commitment towards delivering the Strategy.

The withdrawal of the Strategic Waste Infrastructural Fund is perceived as a retrograde step.

arc21 strongly contends that adequate central government funding, both capital and revenue, is a key requirement to the delivery of resource efficiency. arc21 would have no objection with funding being badged under the Rethink Waste banner. However careful consideration needs to be given to the criteria determining the receipt of funding, particularly that associated with major infrastructure development e.g. it should not be so narrow to confine it to EU landfill compliance but should be also take into account other considerations such as recycling targets, probable forthcoming european measures such as a landfill ban in 2025.

Careful consideration also needs to be given to the delivery mechanism including timing and duration.

In terms of local government, arc21 would advocate a system which ensures equity across the sector.

The establishment of a plastic bag levy introduces an opportunity to ensure the revenue realised is fully utilised in the interests of resource efficiency with reference to the Strategy.

PART 2 - POLICIES AND ACTIONS

Section1 and 2 : Prevention/Reuse/Preparation For Re-use

arc21 broadly welcomes the increased focus on prevention within the revised strategy, and looks forward to contributing to the forthcoming consultation on a draft Waste Prevention Programme for Northern Ireland. There are a number of issues however, that must be highlighted. 9 It is critically important to ensure that our policies and strategies in NI are evidence based, and that the department looks closely at the balance between inputs and outputs. It is vital to avoid a very narrow perspective on re-use in relation to sustainability to ensure that there is no perceived disincentive for councils to engage in re-use.

The difficulty presented by the timing of the waste prevention programme and the necessary production of waste management plans requires to be addressed and arc21 remain committed to engage with the department in this regard.

If waste is prevented, for example through re-use, it must be clear how this can be measured and counted. Policy instruments such as the introduction of a successful re-use scheme or reduction of will negatively impact on ability to achieve weight based recycling targets and this needs to be fully considered. (NB: The European Commission has proposed that the amount of waste “prepared for re-use” could be included in the amount of recycled waste and there would not be a requirement to report the former separately.)

The Department must decide on a clear approach to resource efficiency for Northern Ireland, for example, do we continue to solely targets solely on weight or, as we suggest, should we develop and include targets incorporating a carbon matrix.

Notwithstanding the above, there may be merit in considering an appropriate aspirational target aimed at residual household waste. e.g. per capita or per household

Further consideration must be given as to how to count home composting. Considerable effort has been as is likely to continue to promote home composting. Whilst measuring this has traditionally presented difficulties, arc21 would encourage central government to develop a proportionate methodology which will enable a reasonable indication of performance to be indicated within acceptable tolerance levels.

Consideration needs to be given to the impact that the waste prevention plan will have the setting of other targets such as recycling targets.

Over-dependence on voluntary agreements/responsibility deals as a means of achieving waste prevention. Whist waste prevention initiatives such as Business in the Community, and Fit for Business undoubtedly work in the short term, there is concern in relation to sustainability in the long term (i.e. once funding for audits etc has run out).

arc21 welcome the proposal to develop a Northern Ireland Waste Prevention Programme and are committed to assist the Department in this process. arc21 welcome the commitment to review and revise this every six years. However, the timing of the review needs to be suitably coordinated with other reviews i.e. the Strategy and Waste Management Plans to avoid any subsequent difficulties this presents and to enable each process to be suitably informed.

The development of this programme plan on a Northern Ireland basis is particularly welcome and should particularly benefit proposed communication activities which are likely to form a key element of the plan. It could enable a clear Northern Ireland wide communication campaign with a central point of contact for information, such as the Rethink Waste NI website. We would welcome development of resource efficiency advice across both the 10 public and private sector, so long as the approach is consistent, and not driven by an individual company`s treatment methods or processes.

With several campaigns already fairly well established (e.g. Love Food Hate Waste, European Week of Waste Reduction, Rethink Waste NI) we feel that it is vital for all relevant campaigns to support the eventual agreed actions in the programme, and provide clear links to each other in order to prevent the public becoming both overloaded with information options and confused. There is already some public confusion over the difference between waste prevention, and recycling.

It will be important for the Waste Prevention Programme to include clear definitions and it would be helpful to include, perhaps in appendices, some examples of best practise. As indicated earlier, it will be important that a methodology be developed to measure the effectiveness of the programme and to enable organisations, particularly councils, to report and be recognised on the performance of their activities.

arc21 is of the view that designing out waste, and minimising waste at source on construction sites is integral to both improving resource efficiency and diverting from landfill. Through the use of Site Waste Management Plans/Resource Management Plans companies and organisations can accurately assess their use of materials and the potential for their reuse and recycling both on and off site. arc21 would therefore support a proposal to include the use of Site Waste Management/Resource Management Plans as peer best practice across the construction industry, however we would have some reservations over the effectiveness of a voluntary commitment and this should be assessed.

arc21 would welcome consideration being given to the creation of a single, coordinated, integrated Business Resource Efficiency Service focused on conservation of raw materials, prevention of waste, reduction in waste, reuse of waste materials where at all possible. We feel that the priorities should be on providing streamlined, clear, simple advice to SMEs on sustainable procurement, waste prevention, links to reuse schemes, environmental management systems and developing symbiotic relationships with other SMEs to maximise resource efficiency, as well as on working toward recyclability of wastes not dealt with in these other ways.

Key also is information on the legal obligations of SME`s with regard to their Duty of Care to manage wastes sustainably, as well as information on the economic and competitive- advantage benefits of resource efficiency. Any Business Resource Efficiency service should also be able direct SMEs to local points of contact for support and information.

It is noted that central government has a key role to play in developing appropriate policies and actions on waste prevention, to show leadership and to communicate effectively. Again, greater integration is required between departments, to tackle the overarching issues in relation to waste prevention, including product design and manufacture.

There needs to be greater public awareness, through communication initiatives, of the availability of goods and products for re-use; the means by which they can be made available and the means by which they can be acquired. In this regard arc21 is happy to support the proposal for the department to work with the DECLG in the Republic of Ireland to assess the feasibility of introducing a certifiable re-use quality mark on an all-island basis. The strategy 11 would benefit from articulating this as an action with a scheduled timescale for the publication of a feasibility report.

Section 3 – Recycling

Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste Recycling Target arc21 would again reiterate that it has no objection to the introduction of local recycling targets per se provided it is based and introduced following a transparent consideration of a comprehensive suite of evidence including the crucial component of a Northern Ireland cost/benefit analysis and it has not been considered in isolation of other aspects i.e. part of a holistic process.

There is no evidence to suggest that the proposal to introduce a statutory Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste (LACMW) of 60% by 2020 has been the subject of any such consideration. Such evidence was conspicuous by its absence in the recent public consultation referred to in the Strategy.

In response to this consultation arc21 made a number of other points which we feel are worthy of repeating again in response to this consultation:

 The inclusion in the interpretation of recycling of the appropriate use of key output materials from major strategic waste infrastructure e.g. bottom ash from municipal waste Energy from Waste facilities is welcome. Timely market development activities crucial particularly at a local level.  No individual council specific targets should be set.  Targets should be set at a regional level.  Targets should be aspirational with no statutory basis.  The principle of developing incentives and sanctions is accepted but the detail needs to be developed as part of the wider holistic process suggested.  Early Government financial support is likely to be required.

Since that consultation, it has emerged that a growing number of commercial operations are looking to exploit the collection of specific material from households for recycling for their own commercial advantage. Indeed this was evidenced by the IKEA representatives in his presentation during the departmental event held on the 10th December 2012 as part of the consultation exercise on this strategy. Other companies introducing initiatives include Marks and Spencer (shwop campaign) as well as at a local level a number of outlets offering cash for clothes. Clearly this will impact on the availability of material to councils and consequently on their ability to meet recycling targets as will the potential erosion of the C&I element collected by councils with more outsourcing of the recyclable fractions by customers to the private sector. Equally the impact of a Waste Prevention Programme, yet to be developed, would also need to be factored in.

Notwithstanding the quantum of any target, it will be important to consider the applicability of the target as well as the definition, scope and methodology for calculating it requires to be articulated. Arc21 arc21 acknowlege the reference to a proposed future consultation on these various aspects but would contend this should have formed part of the original consideration on recycling targets. It is interesting to note that mention is made of introducing 12 sanctions and penalties but no mention is made of possible incentives. A balanced approach is needed and this should include consideration of incentives.

Again the development of infrastructure relating to the introduction of a recycling target should feature in considerations including any associated government funding.

Separate Collection

There is significant uncertainty over the implementation flowing from the obligations contained in the Waste Framework Directive pertaining to the separate collection of at least paper, metal, plastic and glass by 2015.

arc21 has continually urged the department to address this urgency as a matter of urgency and priority and in particular to produce the associated guidance. This relates in particular to establishing what is “technically, environmentally and economically practicable” , “necessary quality standards for the relevant recycling standard” and a Code of Practice for MRF Operators. arc21 would urge the department to apply the relevant level of resource and activity to expedite this issue.

The significance of this issue has been recognised by both Defra and the Scottish Government as evidenced by the work they have already commenced. It is important that the department progress this issue now as any further delay will perpetuate the current uncertainty and will only serve to provide an enhanced risk of litigious actions being launched.arc21 would be happy to assist and support the department in efforts to progress this issue in the interests of Northern Ireland.

The department have suggested that they will review the criteria for Rethink Waste funding to ensure an appropriate emphasis should be placed on supporting projects aimed at improving recycling performance in areas where it is currently poor. As indicated elsewhere arc21 are in favour of a review of Rethink Waste funding criteria but would only be supportive of criteria which are clearly fair and equitable and recognise the devil will be in the detail.

arc21 note the example of glass bottles being recycled into a new glass product rather than aggregate is better for the environment. However, arc21 is conscious that some parties in England are concerned that the recent publication of the End of Waste criteria for glass by the European Commission is giving rise to concern that glass only used in remelt applications will be able contribute to recycling figures and arc21 would ask the department to formally clarify this particular aspect.

arc21 note that the North South Market Development Steering Group are committed to take action on an agreed work programme. arc21 would suggest this could be translated into a Strategy action with appropriate timescales added.

Producer Responsibility

arc21 is of the view that the extended producer responsibility targets for producer responsibility on packaging, WEEE, batteries and ELVs are appropriate, however we have some concern in relation to the efficacy of voluntary agreements/responsibility deals as a 13 means of achieving diversion from landfill targets. Although there is no doubt that such agreements and deals have enabled positive progress to be made, arc21 would have concern regarding their overall uptake and their long term sustainability.

It should be noted that the various targets reflect the position throughout the UK and arc21 recognise that introducing different targets in the administrations may distort the market place. However it is also recognised that the actual amount of packaging recycled from Northern Ireland origins cannot be determined at the present and addressing this may be worthy of further consideration.

As stated elsewhere, the Strategy offers an opportunity to introduce measures requiring the packaging and retail industry to tangibly support council collection and disposal infrastructure and services, and to facilitate and promote a greater level of collaboration between producers, retailers and collection/disposal authorities in Northern Ireland.

The department should consider introducing additional producer responsibility regimes for specific waste streams including tyres and paint: Tyres: The industry should be given the overall responsibility for managing tyres that are flytipped or dumped illegally, reducing the need for public bodies to pay for their management, making more resources available for infrastructure development. Paint: Producer and/or retailer responsibility would enable the economic and social benefits of Re:Paint schemes to be made more widely available and could work to the advantage of organisations that already voluntarily support such schemes.

Voluntary Agreements

arc21 are sceptical in relation to the efficacy of voluntary agreements/responsibility deals as a means of achieving diversion from landfill targets. Although there is no doubt that such agreements and deals have enabled positive progress to be made, arc21 would have some concern regarding their overall uptake and their long term sustainability.

Commercial and Industrial Recycling

arc21 support the proposals to introduce a statutory requirement on waste operators to provide specified data on C & I waste and have expressed on a number of occasions that this is overdue. arc21 would also suggest the Strategy should also contain a proposal to closely follow this with the introduction of appropriate targets.

Constructing and Recycling

arc21 note the draft Strategy indicates that meeting the Waste Framework Directive target will be challenging. Accordingly, making provision to legislate for Site Waste Management Plans in the future would be a prudent step and would be supported by arc21.

14 Section 4 – Other Recovery

Infrastructure

arc21 would again reiterate its contention that the department takes a wider and holistic view of the infrastructure requirements, taking recycling and the waste hierarchy into account and to prepare for the expected 2025 landfill ban. Simply addressing infrastructural needs in the context of the minimum required to ensure European Landfill Diversion is too narrow and is wholly incompatible with resource efficiency.

A long-term strategic view is required, with the necessary funding made available, to provide an adequate lead-in time.

Adopting this approach should be reflected in the final version of the Strategy augmented with appropriate actions.

Export of Waste

arc21 welcome the NIEA Regulatory Position Statement on treated residual waste to the EU for energy recovery which is publically available through their website.

We also welcome the consideration of changing the Transfrontier Shipment fees structure to facilitate regular movements of pre treated waste to the Republic of Ireland.

Waste Management Plans

The review process of the arc21 Waste Management Plan has commenced however progress will be influenced by a number of factors out with the control of councils or Waste Management Groups e.g. the final publication of Strategy following this consultation.

However, the timing of future reviews needs to be more suitably synchronised with future reviews of the Strategy to avoid the difficulties currently being experienced.

Planning Considerations

arc21 welcome the proposal in respect of removing BPEO as an absolute requirement from the land use planning process. arc21 is of the view that whilst BPEO is a useful strategic tool, it is inappropriate to apply it to land use planning applications. It is worth noting that Strategic Environmental Assessments only consider environmental impacts, and do not take into account the social and economic costs and benefits that councils and other public authorities are required to consider when making strategic decisions relating to relevant plans and programmes.

15 Section 5 – Disposal

NILAS

arc21 would contend that there is no evidence to suggest that continuing with NILAS beyond 2013 has any benefit. The main driver for landfill diversion continues to be the landfill tax allied to waste hierarchy obligations.

Removing NILAS from 2013 would be consistent with developments in the other administrations in GB e.g. the comparable scheme in England (LATS), has been discontinued by Defra even in the absence of any equivalent recycling targets, statutory or aspirational.

Landfill Tax

arc21 is broadly supportive of devolution of landfill tax, provided that this move has no detrimental long term impact on the NI block grant. The NI Executive should possess the power to set a rate of landfill tax appropriate to local circumstances, which should provide a more transparent link between the revenues raised and the hypothecated funding of environmental projects or for provision of waste infrastructure. However, it is acknowledged that in setting any rate for Northern Ireland, cognisance would have to be taken of the potential impact of any possible distortion of the market place relative to the UK situation

The financial savings that can be made through adopting alternatives to landfill tax are now central to the economics of waste management. The tax has also helped establish the stable policy landscape needed to support long-term investment decisions on waste and resources infrastructure and collection systems.

Diversion of materials from landfill, via prevention, preparation for reuse, reuse or recycling, can help to conserve resources as well as to secure access to materials that can be efficiently cycled back into supply chains and the economy.

A number of other regulatory drivers have also impacted on wastes to landfill:  NILAS/WET Act  IPPC Directive  Waste Acceptance Criteria/Pre-Treatment requirement

The amount and composition of waste going to landfill will be affected by:  possible future bans  materials separately collected for recycling going to landfill, and  technological advancements (such as nappies to plastics/card)

With waste to landfill reducing, the landfill tax cannot therefore be seen as a revenue replacement for Departmental budgetary provision (i.e. community projects should never be in the position of being dependent on landfill tax monies in order to survive).

There may be flexibility to consider new differential rates of landfill tax for stabilised materials e.g. Incinerator Bottom Ash (IBA).

Any replacement tax adopted in NI should: 16  Only be considered where it can be demonstrated that it will help address or mitigate an environmental problem. The tax should reflect the environmental impact of landfill, be set at a rate high enough to encourage businesses and consumers to produce less waste and deal with any waste generated as high up the waste hierarchy as possible, stimulate the recovery of value/resources from waste, and the development of sustainable waste management options  Be a clear signal to consumers and producers about outcomes sought  Be the stimulus for long-term planning for both companies and infrastructure – supporting the “waste hierarchy as a priority” principle  Linked to a Landfill Communities Fund that supports community or environmental projects within NI; with many councils sending waste to recycling facilities outside their boundaries, the 10-mile radius rule should not apply

Consideration must also be given as to who will be responsible for the administration of the tax.

Landfill Restrictions

arc21 would not raise any objection in principle to the proposal for a restriction on food waste to landfill. however arc21 has concerns that ‘separate collection’ of food waste may be viewed in the literal sense, and this needs to be clarified.

arc21 would strongly support the flexibility for local councils:  To collect food waste co-mingled with other organic waste fractions such as garden waste and that this be deemed as ‘separate collection’ i.e. the food is collected separate from the residual waste fraction of waste destined for landfill  To use discretion to apply exemptions to this policy at local level, for example, in dispersed rural communities, and in urban areas where there is limited facility to deliver a bin to kerbside.

Further landfill restrictions should not be introduced until such time as the issues detailed above are concluded. It is noted that to introduce restrictions on further materials, more resources are likely to be required in relation to infrastructure provision and associated needs.

The draft Strategy makes reference to the 2010 WRAP Study commissioned by government administrations across the UK into the feasibility and practicalities of introducing landfill bans and restrictions. This study has since been updated in November 2012 and this should be factored into considerations and reflected in the final Strategy. It is worth noting that the study and the analysis was undertaken at a UK level.

It is noted that a complete ban on biodegradable materials to landfill would be in line with the direction area of travel of EU (likely in 2025) and other regions of the UK, but that adequate support would need to be put in place to enable local authorities to implement, monitor and enforce any restrictions.

Hazardous Waste

There is only very limited consideration of hazardous waste within the draft Strategy.

17 arc21 note the department’s commitment to issue a Hazardous Waste policy statement by the end of 2013. It is unclear what the department intends to include in the policy statement but as a minimum arc21 would suggest that it includes an updated version of the Statement of Facility Needs for Hazardous Waste in Northern Ireland” produced by the department in October 2005.

The department will be aware that Defra produced a document entitled “Strategy for Hazardous Waste Management In England” in March 2010.

There is no apparent reason why the policy statement could not have been produced as part of the development of this draft strategy and therefore be used to inform the revision of the Waste Management Plans. Indeed, the timetable proposed by the department, in this regard, is not conducive with a timely review of the Waste Management Plans.

Section 6 – Better Regulation and Enforcement

arc21 are of the view that partnership working between the various agencies should be at the core of better regulation and enforcement activities and in particular between NIEA and councils.

Given the pressure on resources it is important to ensure that not only are adequate resources are applied but they are optimised and used in the most effective and efficient way. The pilot schemes e.g. flytipping currently in progress to develop better integration of central and local enforcement work are to be encouraged, but to ensure wider enforcement of the requirements of this Strategy are improved and refined, a defined stream of strategic and ongoing funding will be necessary.

A risk-based approach is welcomed as this will focus resource on impact, but to encourage buy-in from communities and the necessary behavioural change, it will be important to consider how dealing and addressing with what may be perceived as “lesser issues” can send the right message.

Fines, the threat of fines, and fixed penalties are seen as vital to successful enforcement, and should be set at a level that will cover costs, as far as is reasonably practicable. Illegal waste disposal needs to be tackled appropriately, and it is highlighted that closer working, and harmonisation with enforcement agencies in the Republic of Ireland will assist in this endeavour.

It is acknowledged that the large number of different pieces of legislation can pose a particular challenge for small businesses, and that better, and more integrated working – between DETI and DOE, and at council level, can go some way towards assisting businesses to meet those challenges.

It will however, still be critical to ensure that businesses play their part in assisting Northern Ireland to meet the required targets. The Net Regs initiative (a partnership between the NIEA and the Scottish Environment protection Agency) has been helpful in this regard. However as the environment is a devolved function, it will be important to ensure that differing legislative requirements and approaches are suitably reflected in the guidance and advice offered by such initiatives. 18 Section 7 – Communication and Education

There is little doubt that the various overarching campaigns culminating in the current Rethink waste campaign have certainly made a positive contribution to the improved situation in regard to Northern Ireland’s performance. The quantum in reduction in waste arising, increase landfill diversion and increased recycling over time would not have been possible without such campaigns.

However continuing and sustaining improvement presents a different and greater degree of challenge. Crucial to success will be funding. It is likely that more will have to be invested in communication and education activities if improvement is to be sustained. More targeted and specifically designed campaigns are likely to be needed to augment general awareness raising.

Joined-up government is vital to the success of the Strategy as there is an urgent need for waste to be viewed as one aspect of a more complex picture. The need for greater behavioural and cultural change will necessitate a strong link to the work of other departments, particularly those linked to work on social deprivation and regeneration, i.e. DSDNI, OFMdFM (SIF and SPP), and DENI

All government departments need to embed relevant waste behaviour message in their customer facing activities, and should be tied in to the revised strategy on these issues as well as on back office practices. It is evident from local government experience that some areas subject to social deprivation could perform better, and it will therefore be critically important to understand the underlying reasons why and subsequently look at incentives and encouragement that lead to better engagement and ultimately improve performance.

Government, both central and local, must become more effective at getting the right messages across, and these messages must be embedded within the education system.

Specialist Environmental Resource Centres could be developed as beacon projects, important in improving practice, developing markets and products and acting as central advice centres.

One of the most efficient and effective means of developing and delivering future plans is through a partnership working model primarily particularly involving the department and local government. arc21 welcome the department’s intention to consider the most appropriate way of delivering future campaigns and communication plans. arc21 suggest that the department engage with local government in a meaningful way as part of the consideration process.

Section 8 – Delivery and Governance

arc21agree the successful delivery of a resource efficient strategy requires the commitment and involvement of a multitude of stakeholders and that they all play their part if Northern Ireland is to move towards resource efficiency.

The draft strategy identifies a key aspect of the delivery will be through the development of Waste Management Plans by the three regional waste Management Groups. The Waste Management Plans require to take account of the Waste Strategy and therefore it is vital that 19 the final strategy is sufficiently developed to inform the contents of the Plan. The number of open-ended policies outlined in the draft strategy that will require further consultation are consequently a concern in this regard. This may also impact on public sector confidence in respect of investment decisions currently under consideration.

Whilst the Waste Management Plans are an important component, it is not appropriate for the final strategy to single out and feature only this particular component in this way. It suggests it is the only key aspect and places a disproportionate significance on such. The final strategy should list all the key aspects which could then be utilised as part of the monitoring process.

It is important to be able to demonstrate the move towards resource efficiency through the development of key performance indicators which are outcome based. As indicated earlier these should not just include weight based statistics but should also incorporate the concept of carbon accounting entailing suitable carbon matrix.

arc21 notes the department’s intention to establish a programme delivery process incorporating the production of a Programme Initiation Document, and the intention to ensure regular reporting and monitoring of progress against actions and targets. Although this initiative appears to be satisfactory in principle, the lack of further information prevents arc21 making any further comment. However, it is important that reporting and monitoring is open, transparent and ongoing.

arc21 would suggest that the proposal to use the Waste Programme Board as having an oversight role may not be the most suitable vehicle in this regard. A more appropriate model would be a similar one to that adopted during the first Waste Management Strategy produced in 2003. This entailed the establishment of a Waste Advisory Board that had an independent Chairperson duly appointed. This body also comprised of a number of people appointed to the Board because of their expertise and knowledge. Representatives of the various stakeholder sectors including the Department regularly attended meetings and updated the Board on progress. The Board reported directly to the Minister. It would be the intention that reports produced by the Board are made publically accessible.

It is important that the range of bodies responsible for various aspects of the Strategy, including those sectors outwith the public service sector, are ‘bought into’ any monitoring model to facilitate accountability. It is suggested that the autonomy and independence flowing from this model would offer greater encouragement for stakeholders to participate in a meaningful way.

Review of Public Administration

arc21 consider appropriate to offer comment in relation to the Review of Public Administration.

Councils are currently working on the local government reform agenda through the ICE programme. However the publication of the finalised Strategy and Waste Management Plans will predate any outcomes of the work on the reform agenda. Accordingly, notes on timing and review should be built into the strategy and plans, also necessitated by the open-ended nature of much of the policy work within the Strategy document, which should be completed

20 by the time of the elections to shadow councils in 2014. The decision on the shape of waste collection and disposal delivery post-reform should be self-determined by councils.

We consider that it may be timely in the context of Local Government Reform to visit the debate on Waste Disposal Authority Models.

______arc21 January 2013

21