Deposit return system much cheaper than presented; House of Representatives deceived with deposit cost study
Decisions on the potential abolition of the deposit on soft drink bottles appear to have been based on a 'scientific study' in which the costs of the deposit system were heavily exaggerated and the benefits significantly underestimated. The currently calculated costs of the deposit system are much lower than the costs that were presented to the House of Representatives at the time.
Decisions regarding the potential abolition of the deposit scheme on soft drink bottles appear to be based on a 'scientific study' in which the costs of the deposit system were heavily exaggerated and the benefits significantly underestimated. The currently calculated costs of the deposit system are much lower than the costs presented to the House of Representatives at the time. Environmental organisations argue that this is no longer a matter of minor errors, but rather of deception. Recycling Netwerk therefore believes that this should lead to a different approach to environmental policy for packaging: in further policy development, the substantial influence of vested corporate interests must be severely restricted.
The deposit system was 'prohibitively expensive', stated the former State Secretary for the Environment Atsma two years ago, referring to a draft report from 'Wageningen University'. And he stuck to that opinion despite the substantive criticism of this report from the environmental organisations united in Recycling Netwerk. Critical scrutiny of the final cost study by CE-Delft has now shown that the deposit system is a factor of two or three cheaper than was presented to the House of Representatives at the time.
Recycling Netwerk believes that this deception should lead to a reflection on the approach to environmental policy for packaging. Chairman Robbert van Duin: “Time and again it has been shown that the recycling percentages reported by businesses and their implementation organisations are not entirely or not at all accurate. Critical voices from environmental organisations and government agencies such as the environmental inspectorate were brushed aside. Now deception has also been revealed in what is, in itself, a simple cost calculation of a deposit system. This leaves no room for any other conclusion on the approach to environmental policy for packaging: after nearly twenty years of meddling, the substantial influence of vested corporate interests must be severely restricted.”
Background information, links, and media coverage can be found via this news item
This page is automatically translated. A human review will follow soon.
