❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for Environment regarding the Container Deposit Scheme, focusing on refund points in the Pilbara and Kimberley, cost implications for consumers, and the role of Return Recycle Renew. The Minister denies cost breaches and clarifies the not-for-profit status of the scheme coordinator.
AnsweredQoN 130Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
CONTAINER DEPOSIT SCHEME
130. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the Minister for Environment:
I
refer to the containers for change scheme and the website
containersforchange.com.au/wa/faqs relating to the scheme.
(1) To date, how
many refund points have been confirmed in the Pilbara region for the containers
for change scheme?
(2) To date, how
many refund points have been confirmed in the Kimberley region for the
containers for change scheme?
(3) The webpage
states —
Drink manufacturers, distributors and
importers who first supply eligible beverage containers into Western Australia
fund the scheme.
Business which first supply an
eligible beverage container into Western Australia will fund the scheme on a cost-per-container
returned basis.
Can the minister explain why on
Wednesday, 18 February, a front page article in The West Australian stated that these costs will be passed on by shops to drinkers?
(4) Does the minister agree that
this presents a breach of consumer and public trust?
(5) Does the
minister maintain that it is appropriate that a subsidiary of Coca–Cola
Amatil, the company that produces most of the containers, stands to profit from
community recycling efforts?
130. Hon ROBIN CHAPPLE to the Minister for Environment:
I
refer to the containers for change scheme and the website
containersforchange.com.au/wa/faqs relating to the scheme.
(1) To date, how
many refund points have been confirmed in the Pilbara region for the containers
for change scheme?
(2) To date, how
many refund points have been confirmed in the Kimberley region for the
containers for change scheme?
(3) The webpage
states —
Drink manufacturers, distributors and
importers who first supply eligible beverage containers into Western Australia
fund the scheme.
Business which first supply an
eligible beverage container into Western Australia will fund the scheme on a cost-per-container
returned basis.
Can the minister explain why on
Wednesday, 18 February, a front page article in The West Australian stated that these costs will be passed on by shops to drinkers?
(4) Does the minister agree that
this presents a breach of consumer and public trust?
(5) Does the
minister maintain that it is appropriate that a subsidiary of Coca–Cola
Amatil, the company that produces most of the containers, stands to profit from
community recycling efforts?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the honourable member for
some notice of the question.
(1) There are 11 refund points.
(2) There are 20 refund points.
(3)–(4) No.
Consistent with the schemes in other states, Western Australia's
container deposit scheme is funded by beverage suppliers. These funds pay for
the 10� refund, collection, processing and sale of the scheme materials for
recycling. Beverage suppliers will determine what costs are passed on to their
customers when making their pricing decisions. Queensland and New South Wales,
which have the most recently introduced schemes in Australia, have had average
cost increases of less than the 10� refund.
(5) Western Australia
Return Recycle Renew is not a subsidiary of Coca–Cola Amatil. It is a not-for-profit
company appointed by the state government as the scheme coordinator. As a not-for-profit
company, it is not permitted to return a profit.
some notice of the question.
(1) There are 11 refund points.
(2) There are 20 refund points.
(3)–(4) No.
Consistent with the schemes in other states, Western Australia's
container deposit scheme is funded by beverage suppliers. These funds pay for
the 10� refund, collection, processing and sale of the scheme materials for
recycling. Beverage suppliers will determine what costs are passed on to their
customers when making their pricing decisions. Queensland and New South Wales,
which have the most recently introduced schemes in Australia, have had average
cost increases of less than the 10� refund.
(5) Western Australia
Return Recycle Renew is not a subsidiary of Coca–Cola Amatil. It is a not-for-profit
company appointed by the state government as the scheme coordinator. As a not-for-profit
company, it is not permitted to return a profit.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.