The model chosen by Ireland to meet its obligations under the European Union regulations for the recycling of single-use plastic bottles and cans is essentially a consumer-driven one. Re-turn, the company which operates the system, may be controlled by the drink and packaging industry, but it relies on consumers bringing their bottles to recycling machines.
Consumers are charged a deposit of between 15 and 25 cent per container and can only recoup it by using the reverse vending machines operated by Re-turn. Coercion is thus the main impetus for the 1.4 billion containers recycled each year.
Other factors are important at the margin. People by and large want to do the right thing, be it recycling plastic bottles and cans or generally following the rules that govern society. They also want to think that their efforts in this regard are making some sort of tangible difference.
It is these factors that help motivate many of us to make the effort to clean and transport bottles and cans to a recycling machine when the reward does not necessarily justify the time and effort.
READ MORE
This goodwill can easily be eroded by factors both beyond and within the control of the scheme operator. Litter scattered across city streets by people scavenging bins for containers is not within Re-turn’s purview, but broken machines, full machines, and machines in the wrong places most definitely are.
In this context, the controversy about executive and board pay at the company is a needlessly self-inflicted wound. A company dependent on the goodwill of the public is under a particular onus to be transparent about its governance. Obfuscation about remuneration is both wrong and short-sighted.
Transparency around this and other issues should be insisted upon by the Department of the Environment, which has oversight of the scheme and can review it every three years. Not least because the company sits on a windfall of €60 million in unclaimed deposits. At a minimum, the controversy should invite scrutiny of Re-turn’s governance.
