The Kiwi Bottle Drive is disappointed to see members of the beverage and packaging sector attack Government ambitions to introduce a beverage container recycling scheme (CRS) in Aotearoa.

“Recent comments from ‘NZ Food and Grocery’ are a throwback to the dark ages and demonstrate how out of touch these organisations are with community sentiment”, says Zero Waste advocate Warren Snow.

Countries around the world are adopting container recycling schemes. The approach of putting a modest refundable deposit on bottles and cans in order to ensure they come back for recycling is spreading rapidly. Within the next couple of years every state in Australia will have a CRS and New Zealand is currently in the process of designing its own.

Olga Darkadaki, Campaign Coordinator for the Kiwi Bottle Drive, points out that: “The New Zealand Government is right to want to act on packaging pollution, as single use plastic, glass and other materials end up in our litter stream, our beaches, and our rivers. The community is right behind them with 83% of the public supporting a New Zealand CRS when surveyed in 2017[1].

But the comments from Katherine Rich[2], CEO of NZ Food and Grocery (NZFG), demonstrate the sector is completely out of touch with mainstream sentiment and cannot be trusted.”

“These comments include the absurd proposition that the price of a drink would raise by 35 cents. First, 20 cents of that would be a deposit, returned to the consumer when they recycle their bottle or can. Once the collection network is rolled out, then over 90% of these 20 cent refunds could be redeemed.

Second, Rich claims a 15-cent cost to operate the scheme. This is extraordinarily high and would make it around five times more expensive than the best performing schemes in the world. Norway for instance achieves 92%+ recycling of drink containers and yet the scheme has a net cost of around 2-3 cents per container. Rich expands on this calculation claiming a case of beer would rise by $8, which is false.”

“Meanwhile, the glass industry and bottlers are mounting a campaign to keep glass out of any New Zealand CRS, again using false data that is repeated by NZFG,” says Darkadaki.

“The Glass Packaging Forum claim New Zealand enjoys a 73% recycling of glass – but this figure has never been independently audited and includes glass that is downcycled into roading or landfill cover or stockpiled – hardly recycling. Our own extensive review conducted in 2017[3] clearly showed that the recovery rates for glass are sitting at 50% or less.”

Report author, Warren Snow, adds that “Glass Packaging Forum members only pay a miserly $3.90 per tonne as their contribution to the cost of collecting glass, whilst we estimate councils are paying over $350 per tonne.

It is untenable that New Zealand would have a CRS that excludes glass. This would disadvantage other packaging materials, be extremely confusing for consumers, leave local government still picking up the tab for glass collection and miss an opportunity to remove glass bottles from our parks, rivers, beaches and of course landfills.

Given glass is also the medium of choice for refillable beverages, excluding it from the CRS means we miss the opportunity to use the CRS to boost the refillables industry, which is crucial for reducing the overall greenhouse gas emissions of the beverage industry.

Further comments by NZFG that local government are somehow going to profit from a CRS are both offensive and false. Local councils currently pick up the lion’s share of the costs of all the recovery and recycling of packaging materials via household kerbside collections”.

“The goal of all product stewardship schemes is to take the cost of collection and recycling away from the community and back on to producers. The fact local government is involved in designing the CRS, does not mean they’ll somehow be profiting from it” says Darkadaki.

“Unfortunately, the New Zealand CRS design process appears to have got tangled in a web of competing vested interests that are trying their best to slowly whittle the scheme down. At some point the government must lead and mandate government policy to an obviously recalcitrant industry. The recent comments from NZFG and their members demonstrate the sector has no intention of supporting the government to introduce a CRS and will actively undermine the process and outcome,” warns Snow.

An incoming New Zealand government and Minister will be required to set an appropriate refund value. A 20-cent deposit/refund would place New Zealand at around average globally. This rate will also ensure New Zealand doesn’t have to go back and increase the fee to keep up with inflation - all signals from the Australian 10 cent schemes are that those states will in the short to medium term raise theirs to 20 cents.

“It is extremely unfortunate that while the rest of the world moves forward in tackling the scourge of packaging pollution, here in Aotearoa the drinks industry use false and misleading data and commentary to continue to avoid any responsibility”.

[1] See p.11 of this report: TA Forum (2017) Cost–Benefit Analysis of a Container Deposit Scheme: summary report and FAQs, http://www.wasteminz.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Container-Deposit-Scheme-Summary-Report-Final.pdf

[2] https://www.fgc.org.nz/beverage-prices-will-jump-under-crs-design/

[3] Responses to the Packaging Forum’s Arguments Against a CDS (Container Deposit Scheme) for New Zealand:

© Scoop Media