Need For Public Education
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some presenters spoke about how critical public education will be to the success of a beverage container recycling program, and underlined the need to have funds available for this purpose. While voluntary programs are already operating successfully in some communities such as Inuvik, recycling will be new for others. Mayor Evelyn Storr from Aklavik provided the example of people taking cans of pop out to their camps. "What they want to bring back is their muktuk and their fish and they do not want to bring back empty cans...We are asking people to try to change their lifestyle when we ask them to separate their garbage. Before, garbage was garbage."
The committee sees this as one of the reasons why it will be so important to have representation from small communities on the advisory committee, so that programs and education strategies can be designed to be as relevant to them as to the larger centres where recycling is already more common.
Costs To Individuals
The department shared with the committee estimates of the costs to the average NWT household of the proposed beverage container recycling program. The estimates are $2.61 per month for households that return their containers to claim their deposits back, and $7.95 per month for households that do not return their containers.
The committee would like to remind the government that these are averages only, and that some households with more family members, or who consume more beverage containers than average will have higher costs. These costs may be significant for people with fixed incomes, and this should be reflected in the income support program.
What Happens To Collected Products?
Members heard from Ms. Katherine Silcock, from the City of Yellowknife, that she has experienced a number of difficulties finding places in Alberta that are willing to take NWT waste products including pop cans and tires. The committee would urge the government to get to work immediately on discussions with businesses and governments in other jurisdictions in order to ensure there are places to send NWT products.
What Happens To Containers That Are Sold Before The Deposits Start?
The department indicated it expects that depots will end up taking in some containers that are sold before the deposits begin to be collected. Although this will be a cost to the environment fund, on the whole the result will be positive as containers will be recycled rather than going to landfills. The department will need to ensure depots are given startup funds that are adequate to cover any deposits they may have to pay out if containers have been stockpiled in the community for some time.
Will Retailers Who Buy Products From Outside The NWT Have To Pay Two Deposits?
The committee heard that some retailers in the NWT buy beverages from Alberta and are already paying Alberta deposits on them. Ms. Judy Harder was concerned that this will mean she and other retailers will have to increase their prices to reflect both deposits. The committee was, however, advised that NWT retailers may be eligible for refunds from the Alberta Beverage Container Recycling Corporation provided the beverages are not resold or recycled in Alberta. The committee urges the government to take steps to ensure that retailers pay only the NWT deposit on beverage containers, possibly including inter-jurisdictional agreements which would take the onus off of individual retailers to reclaim their deposits.
Who Will Run Depots And Processing Centres?
The department assured the committee that if there is no group or business in a community that is interested in operating a depot, no one will be forced to do it. However, one witness, Ms. Barb Armstrong of AB Salvage in Inuvik, wondered about what would happen in the opposite situation, where there is more than one group or business interested in recycling. How will the government decide who has the opportunity to run the depot or processing centre?
The department will need to consult and communicate on this issue in the near future so that existing businesses and organizations will know where they stand.
Location Of Processing Facilities
The Minister has advised the committee that Hay River, Yellowknife and Inuvik are the proposed locations for processing facilities. Members would recommend the government give some consideration to locating these facilities in smaller communities so they too could see some economic benefits from the program.
Other Programs
Presenters had a number of suggestions for future programs to deal with materials such as electronic waste -- also called e-waste -- batteries, used motor oil, construction waste and tires. These are all good suggestions which the committee hopes government will look at in future years. The possibility of programs targeted at industry, in particular resource exploration and development companies who have usually buried their waste or brought it to community landfills, was also discussed. Members hope this legislation will encourage all citizens, including corporate citizens, to be more proactive about reducing, reusing and recycling waste. Ms. Armstrong summed it up well when she said, "long gone are the days of solution to pollution is dilution...You bring it in, take it out." The committee would also encourage the government to consider how programs under this legislation might be tied with other environmental initiatives such as cleanups of old industrial sites.
Members hope that interested communities will be able to access money from the environment fund to undertake pilot projects. For example, Mayor Winnie Cadieux from Enterprise indicated that her community would like to enter into discussions with the government about potential reuse programs that could be located there.
Conclusion
The committee was impressed with the number of private individuals, business people, and members of environmental groups who made submissions or came to speak on this bill, and who are clearly willing to do what it takes to make this legislation work. Members would encourage the government to take heed of the advice provided by these people, and to welcome them as partners in developing and implementing programs and regulations.
Bill 22 is only the first step, Mr. Speaker. As Ms. Erica Janes from Ecology North said, "the next government needs to be committed to this legislation and committed to the overall desire to protect our fragile environment." The committee very much hopes that this will be the case.
That concludes the report on Bill 22. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Member for Hay River North to introduce Bill 25.