Blog

Pay as you throw proposals

August 28, 2007 at 2:18 pm

With Britain being one of the worst countries in Europe for recycling, proposals have been put forward by local authorities for three schemes which would aim to increase our recycling rate and decrease our council tax bills.

Microchipped wheelie bins
Our rubbish would be identified by a microchip fitted to the bin and the weight of the rubbish ascertained by a machine on the dustcart enabling us to be charged according to the amount of waste generated. This would cost the average family around £10 a month.

Unchipped wheelie bins
In areas where bins are not microchipped, we would be able to choose the size of bin required with an 80 litre bin costing £85 per year and a 240 litre one costing £130 per year.

Pre-paid sacks
In areas where wheelie bins are impractical, we would have to buy pre-paid rubbish sacks costing about 60p for a 50 litre sack.

Reaction to these proposals
It is estimated by local authorities that these measures would result in a reduction of £30 a year in council tax. This may not seem much but, of the 1028 people polled by the Local Government Association, 64% of us were in favour of measures being introduced to reward those who recycle most and penalise those who don’t.

The Conservatives are highly sceptical, warning that the schemes would be far too hard to administer efficiently, would not result in lower council tax and would end up making people far more likely to fly-tip or burn their rubbish. In Ireland, where such schemes exist already, the unscrupulous have been ingenious in avoiding paying. So long as there is nothing in their rubbish to identify them, they think nothing of dumping it on the street or in skips, infuriating the law abiding majority of Irish citizens. With this in mind, who knows what the future has in store for these proposals?

Posted in Uncategorized |

6 responses to “Pay as you throw proposals”

  1. Brenda Bleackley says:

    I think “pay as you throw” is a great idea. I think it will encourage those who don’t recycle to start. There are many on my road who could use this type of encouragement.

  2. Melissa Shovelton says:

    I think that in theory “pay as you throw” is a good idea, however a big chunk of household waste cannot be recycled and therefore people would be penalised for throwing away things that they have no control over. I am a keen recycler and I find that I have real trouble recycling plastic other than plastic bottles such as meat packets and cling film etc. Also aluminium foils. My household waste would be virtually non existent if there were somewhere that I could recycle these things. The government needs to sort out these problems and make it easier for people to recycle things before they start to impose penalties. I think that everyone would recycle if it were easier.

  3. Hannah Jay says:

    Although it sounds like a great idea, “Pay as you throw” might not be as brilliant. It would have a severe effect on people who don’t have as much money as the average family. It would help more recycling, but, with all the taxes, and food and clothing expenses, “Pay as you throw” might actually strip the families of their saved money for family trips, or treats. So, is it really our recycling answer?

  4. Aisha Gharsalli says:

    Although I think the “Pay as you throw” idea is great, there is another very good alternative. I think New York put it into place a while ago. The idea is that people pay a certain amount for a bottle/can/etc. and when they return it, they get a certain percentage back. This would give homeless/poor people some means of making extra needed money. It would also eliminate the problem of trash lying around everywhere. Before a person threw away his/ her can, they would think twice about the money that would eventually add up if they returned it. My Comp 2 teacher was telling us about it, and i though WOW that’s a great suggestion. Just thought id share it with you!!!!

  5. Saja Rum says:

    I agree with my friend below me. Recycling in New York proved to be efficient by giving people money back in the end. People literally cleaned the streets up for you and submitted the recycable items to get a profit out of it. However, it seems unfair that you would have to pay so much to reycle and only receive 30 ponds in the end. Many poor families cant afford that. The ironic thing is that they are actually helping society, so why pay? I think the cost in the end should be greater than the cost in the begining. But if people will resort to burning trash and causing more pollution then "Pay As You Throw" should be enforced. Especially since they claim that Britian is a filthy country.

  6. Erica Johnston says:

    I agree with my two friends Bottle deposits are so much better than this pay as you throw buisness. With bottle deposits it helps curbsude recycling programs, it prevents liter, it helps the homeless, and it gives people incentives to litter! With the pay as you recycle idea I don’t think most families could afford that. Besides if you don’t choose to do the bottle deposits you don’t lose any money you just don’t get the money that you paid for the bottle in the first place back.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *