The politics of e-waste

 

Last Monday’s budget has placed waste on the national agenda once more.  This time the focus is on waste generated by electric and electronic equipment. Put simply the issue is that there exists conflicting legislation on the Maltese statute book. On the one hand it is the applicability of the Eco-Contribution Act. On the other hand its the WEEE Directive of the EU which has been transposed into Maltese legislation as of 2007 (Legal Notice 63 of 2007 since replaced by Legal Notice 204 of 2014). WEEE meaning Waste from Electric and Electronic Equipment.

The Eco-Contribution Act of 2004 established the quantum of an eco-contribution to be paid on electric and electronic equipment. This eco-tax was added on to the price of the various electric and electronic equipment sold in local shops: fridges, ovens, telephones, computers, electronic games, calculators, vending machines ………………….  The  amount of tax payable ranging from 25 euro cents to €69.88.

Eco-contribution collected peaked in 2008 at slightly over €15.6 million. It is estimated that around €7.8 million will be collected in 2014 and another €6 million in 2015.

As of 2007 producers (and their representatives), in addition to being responsible for the payment of the eco-contribution, have also been responsible for implementing the WEEE Directive in Malta. This Directive forms part of a number of a set of EU Directives which address different waste streams with the objective of ensuring that waste is considered as a precious resource. Hence the need to recover this resource in order to reintegrate it into the economy.  This means the transformation of all waste into useable resources.

The Directive applied the principle of extended producer responsibility throughout the life of the equipment.  This signifies that producers of electric and electronic equipment, directly as well as through their representatives (the importers) and those dealing with such equipment at points of sale retain responsibility throughout the life cycle of the products. This life cycle thinking has its first impact on the drawing board as producers seek to minimise the use of resources not only cost-wise but also due to the fact that if they do so they will have less to recover. This encourages eco-design. Thereby designing and subsequently producing products whilst keeping in mind their impact throughout their life. It is much more that a cradle to grave view. In fact it is considered as a cradle to cradle approach as at the end of its useful life a product will through recovery of the materials of which it is made up give rise to new products.

What does it signify for us?

Producers and their representatives have the direct responsibility of recovering  electric and electronic waste. In terms of the Directive they will either recondition the equipment or else strip it into its component parts and recycle the resulting materials. This will be done at a cost.  Depending on the efficiency of the process the producers and their representatives will recover a proportion of their costs when they sell the recovered resources.  The unrecovered costs may, in terms of the Directive, be added on to the price of the products. Producers’ representatives in Malta maintain that it is possible for the quantum of the unrecovered costs to be much lower than  what is currently being paid as an eco-contribution. Hence the net impact could be not only environmentally beneficial but also of direct benefit to the consumer.

The budget has announced a transition period lasting up to the end of August 2015 when it is planned that the eco-contribution on electric and electronic equipment is removed and producers (through their local representatives) assume their full extended responsibilities.

Electric and Electronic waste is currently collected by local councils through their bulky refuse service. It is also collected at bring-in sites operated by Wasteserve.  Producers will seek to coordinate these existing collection services with their already operational recovery schemes.

Alternattiva Demokratika-The Green Party as well as GRTU and other producers representatives have been insisting for ages that this is the way forward. In order to achieve results everyone must however play his part.

The net result will be beneficial for both the environment as well as the economy.

 

published in The Independent on Sunday – 23 November 2014

EU elections: Business and the environment

I was present yesterday for the launch of a Business Manifesto addressed to MEP candidates. The Manifesto entitled “We’re in Business together. A Maltese Business Manifesto.”  lists the expectations of the business community. The launch was organized by the office of the European Parliament in Malta.

As expected the manifesto deals extensively on the role of business in job creation, its importance to the economy, the vulnerabilties of SMEs and the difficulties faced by Maltese Business, mostly micro-business, as a result of both its size as well as Malta’s peripherality and insularity.

The five business organisations did a good job with one exception. They were apprehensive about environmental and social issues. The business manifesto does not refer to environmental and social issues except in a negative manner. There is no valid reason for this position. The experience of Maltese business organisations (with very few exceptions) points elsewhere. It is generally a positive experience.

May I remind that the Federation of Industries, now forming part of a unified Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry had years back endorsed and adhered to the UN Global Compact. The Malta Business Bureau has embarked on a water awareness campaign, GRTU through  enterpreneur Noel Gauci (together with others) has been at the forefront of research on wave energy and its applicability to Malta to tap alternatve energy sources.

Similarly on socal issues most Maltese SMEs are good employers and it would be a misrepresentation if one were to focus on the negative comments on social issues in the Business Manifesto as being representative of Maltese Business.

Maltese Business and SMEs in particular have to view environmental and social issues not as obstacles but as challenges which can be transformed into new opportunities. Those who realise this and put it into practice will lead the way. The others will follow.

Il-bojkot ta’ Ċensu Farrugia

Ċensu Farrugia tal-GRTU jrid bojkot. M’huwiex ser jattendi laqgħat tal-MCESD meta dawn jiddiskutu l-prekarjat.

Il-Gvern, ġustament irid jiġġieled il-prekarjat li f’Malta hu b’saħħtu prinċipalment minn fuq il-kuntratti tal-Gvern u tal-korpi parastatali. Għax il-kuntratti tal-Gvern jintrebħu (ġeneralment) minn min joffri l-orħos prezz. U l-iktar mod prattiku kif uħud iqisu li jistgħu jaslu għal offerta li tkun l-orħos huwa billi jagħsru liż-żgħir.

Ġustament il-Gvern għandu fil-mira tiegħu dawn il-kuntratti.  Sa hawnhekk tajjeb.

L-ewwel idea tal-Gvern kienet li ma jippermetiix iktar li jkun hemm sub-contracting. Ċjoe li min jirbaħ kuntratt ma jitħallix jgħaddi l-kuntratt (jew kif isir ġeneralment parti minnu) lil ħaddieħor. Kien hemm opposizzjoni għal din l-idea. Din issa inbidlet u minflok hawn l-idea li min jitfa l-offerta jrid jgħid minn qabel min ser ikunu is-subcontractors u l-kundizzjonijiet oħra dwarhom li japplikaw.

L-idea tal-Gvern hi tajba imma m’hiex prattika.

Fl-opinjoni tiegħi biex il-Gvern jiġġieled bis-saħħa lill-prekarjat ma hemm bżonn jibdel (kważi) xejn ħlief il-livell tas-sorveljanza tal-kuntratti.

Il-kundizzjonijiet ġenerali tal-kuntratti tal-Gvern diġa joħolqu qafas ta’ regolamentazzjoni dwar is-sub- contracts. Min jirbaħ kuntratt ta’ xogħol jew servizz għall-Gvern diġa għandu l-obbligu li ma jistax jaqbad u jiddeċiedi hu li jagħti sub-contract. Dan jista’ jagħmlu biss wara li kiseb l-approvazzjoni tal-Gvern.

Għaldaqstant kullma jeħtieġ li jsir mill-Gvern hu li jistabilixxi regoli ċari tal-kriterji li fuqhom jagħti l-permess biex ġaladarba kuntratt ikun intrebaħ ikun jista’ jkun hemm sub-contractors. Punt ewlieni ta’ dawn il-kritierji għandu jkun li ma jingħatax lok għal prekarjat u li kundizzjonijiet minimi ta’ xogħol ikunu rispettati.

Biex  infasslu flimkien l-aħjar triq kif nistgħu naslu ħalli negħlbu l-prekarjat huwa neċessarju li jkun hemm kulħadd madwar il-mejda.  Għalhekk il-bojkott ta’ Ċensu Farrugia m’hu ser isolvi xejn.

Dan parir bla ħlas.

Gonzi u l-White Rocks: l-interessi personali u l-profitti

 

Lawrence Gonzi kien rappurtat dalgħodu mit-Times li wieġeb għall-kritika ta’ Paul Abela (ex Sindku Nazzjonalista tas-Swieqi u illum President tal-GRTU) dwar il-proġett tal-White Rocks billi qal li dan (Abela) għandu interessi personali u interessi ta’ profitt u li l-kritika tiegħu għall-proġett tal-White Rocks hi motivata minn dan.

Mur obsor, kemm hu għaref il-Prim ! Mhux ovvja li min (flimkien ma ħaddieħor) tefa’ offerta li wara proċess twil ta’ negozjati ġiet aċċettata jfittex li jħares l-interessi tiegħu.

Paul Abela fl-artiklu tiegħu  ippubblikat fit-Times of Malta tal-14 ta’ Lulju 2010 qal li l-Gvern kien għadu marbut mal-consortium bl-isem Costa San Andrea li miegħu kienu saru negozjati wara sejħa għall-offerti fl-1999.

Bil-mod kif qed jitkellem Lawrence Gonzi qiesu li dawk li magħhom qiegħed jinnegozja l-Gvern tiegħu ġejjin jagħmlu l-karita’. Dawn għall-profitti ukoll ġejjin, profitti li biex jimmaterjalizzaw talbu art li fuqha jkunu jistgħu jinbnew 300 appartament. Il-fondi ġġenerati mill-bejgħ tal-appartamenti jagħmlu tajjeb kemm għall-profitti kif ukoll għall-ispejjes biex jinbena dak li Lawrence Gonzi qed isejjaħlu kumpless sportiv, imma li fir-realta’ għadu mhux ċar eżatt x’ser ikun.

Il-mistoqsijiet mhux imwieġba mill-Gvern ta’ Gonzi qed jiżdiedu, u issa magħhom żdiedu dawk ta’ Paul Abela : għadu marbut mal-consortium Costa San Andrea jew le ?  

Għal uħud mill-mistoqsijiet l-oħra, ara ukoll fuq dan il-blog :

 3 ta’ Lulju                 Land Speculation at White Rocks

13 ta’ Ġunju                 The White Rocks Project