ALL previous anti litter campaigns made no difference to the amount of litter dropped on our streets, according to the chairman of Irish Business Against Litter (IBAL), Mr Tom Cavanagh.
Launching IBAL's attitudinal survey on litter, Mr Cavanagh said more litter was being dropped today than ever before, despite campaigns and educational programmes. The only difference was that cleaning was now more efficient.
The survey shows that more than one in two adults believe the public does not care about Ireland's litter problem, while 72 per cent consider stronger legislation is needed. One in two did not know the maximum on the spot fine.
The survey, conducted by Lansdowne Market Research during the past two months, found that 80 per cent thinks a litter free Ireland would attract more foreign companies, 78 per cent believes it would mean more tourists, and 70 per cent said it would improve the image of our food industry.
Two out of three adults identified take away food shops as one of the locations where litter would be found, but only 7 per cent believed its own areas do not have a litter problem.
Mr Cavanagh, who is a Cork businessman and AIB director, said the survey crystallised the problem and offered an insight into the manner in which the Irish public would like to see it tackled.
The reason the group formed was to put pressure on the Government to take meaningful action in terms of stronger legislation, which would lead to more effective enforcement. "I am glad to say that the survey points clearly to the fact that the Irish public agrees with the need for a representative voice on this issue.
Mr Cavanagh added that IBAL was encouraged so far by the Minister's plans, but warned that a further survey would be held in six months to determine if the campaign had been successful and to establish whether attitudes had changed.
Even though the survey asked questions concerning the privatisation of the cleaning services, Mr Cavanagh insisted IBAL had no agenda other than a cleaner Ireland. However, he said that local authorities were spending £25 million "and doing a bad job", and suggested that consideration could be given to other ways of doing it. But "we do not care who does the cleaning, so long as it is done."