Much has been said about the BCRS initiative that the government introduced via a private sector initiative. For far too long we have relied on societal goodwill to recycle. At the same time, producers were at a disadvantage for there were insufficient regulatory measures to help them recover and recycle packaging materials placed on the market.
Malta was on the losing side in its credibility and track record when reporting its performance to the European Union.
Rewind to EU pre-accession times and we all recall the efforts of individuals to return their non-alcoholic beverage bottles to get back their two cents deposit. For those who could not be bothered there were individuals who would roam the beaches, public areas and waste bins, even diving to recover bottles and recoup those two cents. It worked.
Unfortunately, as part of our accession talks, the system of bottling carbonated beverages in returnable glass bottles was deemed a barrier to trade. Fast forward to 2023, we are introducing the same concept and, once again, it proves that it works. Recycling volumes have never been so high in the area of beverage containers. So let us not debate the principle.
It is true that the public and commercial enterprises have lamented on the number of reverse vending machines (RVMs) and that they fill up too quickly and that collection rates should be more frequent. Probably there are legitimate points in such feedback but does not everyone have teething problems when piloting a new initiative, be it a government or a public entity?
Improvements are already being seen in the original infrastructure. What is true is that Malta has joined many other countries in mainstreaming a mechanism that will ensure recycling and which will give producers the tool to reach their targets. The aim should be to reflect the same level of ambition by both consumers and producers. So where do we go from here?
The collection of waste is the only utility that today bears no form of cost- Kevin Gatt
The BCRS concept in the first instance needs to expand to include wines and spirits. The infrastructure is there and can be expanded to accommodate this waste stream. Secondly, we must also start thinking where to go to include other packaging materials such as containers that hold detergents, personal hygiene products and other foodstuffs.
The opportunity is there and this should remove considerable material from our pavements as such material is diverted straightaway to designated depots. It will also continue to enhance recycling performance and raise our standing.
As from this year, municipal waste collection has been regionalised, a suggestion floated in Malta’s Waste Management Strategy way back in 2014 and fleshed out in the 2021 Long Term Waste Management Strategy. This in order to give operators larger economies of scale to be able to invest in a modern collection infrastructure.
The introduction of the BCRS should have seen a reduction in the amount of beverage containers that previously filled grey, green and black bags simply because, through the 10c deposit, we have introduced a responsibility and a penalty. Those who comply will not face any financial penalty and the mark-up in prices is only a one-time hike. This thought process now needs to be applied to municipal solid waste.
The revised waste framework directive requires EU member states that:
• by 2025, the preparing for re-use and the recycling of municipal waste shall be increased to a minimum of 55 per cent by weight;
• by 2030, the preparing for re-use and the recycling of municipal waste shall be increased to a minimum of 60 per cent by weight;
• by 2035, the preparing for re-use and the recycling of municipal waste shall be increased to a minimum of 65 per cent by weight.
There is no other way for us to achieve these targets unless we finally agree, as a society, that the provision of waste management is a service which comes at a cost like all other services. The collection of waste is the only utility that today bears no form of cost.
Those who call charging for such a service a tax do so with the intention of scaremongering decision- and policymakers into not making ‘pay as you throw’ (PAYT) a mainstay of waste management services.
The country is investing a record €0.5 billion in the provision of new infrastructure to handle the different fractions of waste. Not distinguishing the social responsibility of all to separate waste according to the different fractions that the waste investment is tailored for will continue to handicap Malta’s performance in the sector.
Moreover, it will continue to permeate the status quo while limiting the innovation that the government and the private sector can offer to move from the primitive manner in which our waste is managed to one that recognises waste as a resource.
The organic, recyclable and mixed waste bags could be standardised and pre-paid for with the payment reflecting the cost for collecting and treating the waste.
This will incentivise waste generators to separate their waste as there will be a cost advantage to do so. After all, what will happen is that we will be taking responsibility for our actions, which, in turn, will start to change our behaviour in terms of the amount of waste we generate and our consumption habits.
Political parties need to converge on this principle for political will in the context of good waste governance, which is not only an obligation on the government of the day but also of all those with a political agenda.
We can debate the charges and the phasing, but we cannot debate the principle if we want to raise our level of waste management practices to those of our European peers.
Kevin Gatt is head of the Department of Spatial Planning and Infrastructure at the University of Malta.