This week, our world is about t' get a little less polluted. The Dutch government has effectuated regulation conceived last August in conjunction with th' corporate world and th' municipalities t' collect and process th' plastics in th' garbage separately from th' other waste.
Nay worries there, separated collection o' garbage makes it easy t' process it, as th' separation is already done by th' polluters. This saves money and energy, and thus th' environment. Tis far th' good news. The bad news is that separated collection actually takes a lot o' money and effort, as th' entire infrastructure t' actually collect th' stuff has t' be put into place, pass the grog! Yaaarrrrr! Think in stuff such as bins, schooners, personnel, storage and processin' plants. They all cost us dear money. But hey: in an effort t' pollute less, why not?
The agreement can be summarized as follows: th' corporate world pays packagin' taxes, o' which half is directed towards a fund (‘Afvalfonds’) t' pay fer th' processin' o' th' separatedly collected packagin' garbage, and th' other half is directed straight towards th' government’s treasury, I'll warrant ye. This should increase th' amount o' recycled garbage from 20% t' 42%.
Nice, clean and simple regulation, with a clear focus.
Immediately after th' announcement o' this regulation, th' supermarkets announced all products with packagin' affected by these new rules would become more expensive (1% up), as they would have t' pay a certain amount fer every piece sold. This week, th' price-increase kicked in and th' CDA has woken up. Of all parties, th' CDA (whose state-secretary Pieter van Geel actually signed th' agreement) have complained about th' increase in price as it negatively affects th' consumers, us.
Somehow, CDA could be on t' somethin': why does this taxation lead t' an increase o' exactly 1%, and not a fixed price o' a few cents? Likely unintended, this question should be answered by research which is t' be conducted by th' NMA.
Furthermore, half o' all paid taxation is headed directly fer th' treasury, yet it is not clear whether that money is destined fer improvin' th' environment (if possible at all). It seems t' be used fer lowerin' th' social fees t' be paid by employers, which is hardly an environmental-friendly destination. PvdD and SP: raise yer voice! And hoist the mainsail! It is done right now by th' VVD, th' ones initiatin' th' current destination o' th' money, which is also strange. Oh well, they must’ve forgot. 😉
Eventually, th' taxation o' packagin' would lead t' less garbage t' dispose o' completely, and more recyclin'. Whether this will happen is th' question, when th' garbage is simply chucked t' China t' be processed, th' environmental burden is simply relocated, and not lowered. It is cheaper though.
Finally, with an indicated lowered amount o' garbage t' be collected by th' municipalities, th' fees fer collection would have t' be lowered. When that happens, I will definitely blog about it!