Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B687 - Bottle Deposits Bill 2014 (Second Reading) Watch

    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    B687 - Bottle Deposits Bill 2014 (Second Reading), TSR Government

    Bottle Deposits Bill 2014
    An Act introducing deposits on plastic and glass beverage bottles.

    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1: Preparation of Bottles
    (1) This Act applies to beverages sold in sealed plastic bottles and beer and cider sold in glass bottles.
    (2) Manufacturers must present their bottle dimensions and barcode to the Government.
    (3) Plastic bottles to which this Act applies must bear a barcode and the legend "DEPOSIT £0.25".
    (4) Glass bottles to which this Act applies must bear a barcode and the legend "DEPOSIT £0.10".

    2: Introduction of Deposits
    (1) A charge of 25 pence per bottle will be added at the time of sale to the price of beverages sold in plastic bottles.
    (2) A charge of 10 pence per bottle will be added at the time of sale to the price of beer and cider sold in glass bottles.
    (3) This charge applies first when the product is sold by the manufacturer, but must be maintained in all following transactions
    (4) The deposit must be included in the displayed price.
    (5) The manufacturer must provide a record of all deposits levied and provide this, along with the deposit money, to the Government on the final working day of each month (the final working day before the 24th for December).

    3: Reverse Vending Machines
    (1) The Government will install and maintain a reverse vending machine in all premises
    selling beverages on which a deposit is levied with a floor area of at least 300 m2.
    (2) Reverse vending machines must accept the empty bottles and return the deposit.
    (3) The deposit may be returned either in cash or electronic payment.

    4: Commencement, Short Title and Extent
    (1) This Act may be cited as the Bottle Deposits Act 2014.
    (2) This bill shall extend to the United Kingdom; and
    (3) Shall come into force on the 1st of September 2015.

    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Changes:
    * Plans for standardised bottles are removed; manufacturers must inform the Government of the shape and size of their bottles.
    * The deposit applies at every transaction, starting with when the bottle is sold by the manufacturer, so manufacturers are responsible for collecting the deposits.
    * The minimum floor area to require an RVM is increased to 300 m2
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I read the original bill just down from here and I will recycle the arguments someone posted on it. Sorry for the steal... :lol:

    No!

    This is not needed and will not increase recycling. Recycling is highest in Austria with 63%, second is Germany with 62%. This idea sounds very similar to something in Germany. The system in Germany is under debate for its effectiveness. Britain is currently at 39% of household waste being recycled but is the fastest growing in the world. Austria does not have this system and its recycling rates are far higher.

    Over 70% of all households in Germany (Berlin for this example) have at least seven recycling bins. Each homeowner is legally required to separate out each material and place it in the appropriate recycling bin ready for collection by a fee-to-use private company. Collection doesn't just stop at local level, the recycled material is sent to privately owned factories where it is further sorted and recycled into new products, e.g. Molten plastics. The products are then sold on at a price subsidised by the state to companies to be made into a new complete products such as plastic bottles. Plastic bottles are sometimes washed and bought back by the company that first used them (a milk company could buy back it's old milk cartels to wash and reuse). The latter rarely happens.

    In the UK most recycled waste is sent abroad where it is either reused or dumped. In fact, only 20% of all recycled waste in the UK is recycled compared to 87% in Germany. Implementation of a policy as outlined in the bill above will not drive up recycling, it will merely add an extra cost to products sold in shops (decreasing demand, revenue and profits), and generate extra income for the government as not everyone will be bothered to recycle. Forget the 'pasty tax', this will be the 'milk tax.'

    For or recycling to increase in the UK the process by which we recycle needs to change. Councils need to do more in the form of several a bins to sort waste into and recycling companies need to be more active in recycling waste instead of shipping it abroad. The current campaigns are working as the UK is the fastest grower, in terms of household waste recycled, in the world.

    What can possibly be the justification for wanting to implement such a policy when, firstly, there has been no study conducted into it's effectiveness and secondly, when there is no plan for the recycled material after?

    Besides, each individual driving from their home to a large public building with recycling waste increases CO2 levels as a result of increased car use. It's counter-productive. Who will pay for these big recycling bins to refund the deposit?

    Who is going to meet the cost for implementing this costly admin nightmare? The installation of machines cost money, the running of machines cost money, the collection of bottles from machines cost money and removing bottles from the machine not only costs money but uses up CO2 in the lorries. This doesn't seem to be thought through at all. Assume 30% of all deposits are being collected back (I'm being generous here as I think more people will want their money back so the figure would be nearer 60%) that won't cover the cost of a 'reverse vending machine' in every vendor building with over 300m^2 floor area. This would include pretty much every office block, airport, shopping centre, leisure centre, supermarket, school, library, skyscraper, hotel, restaurant and a whole array of other buildings (most have a vending machine in selling such bottles). The cost will be enormous and the government will be spending money just to increase recycling (which we don't even know will happen) to meet EU targets. The UK is on course to meet the EU target of 50% of household waste anyway without this measure.

    Another problem; I go to Tesco and buy a big 24 can pack of Coca Cola. I drink them all and currently put out the cans in the recycling bin ready for the council's weekly collections to collect. If I'm charged an extra £6 or so for this pack, not only am I paying more in taxes than I am for the actual drink, I need to make an additional journey to drop off the cans just to reclaim my money. If I'm doing my own recycling, why have the council at all? They will just be doing paper and cardboard. The whole thing is ridiculous. You are paying the same for a service that does less.

    This is typical Labour proposal. Labour complain about the Pasty Tax but then go an propose a Coca Cola tax. :rolf: I would prefer to see the bill about sleeves voted in than I would this.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No.The cost to implement this is too high. There are other ways to increase the amount recycled.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    As none of my concerns were addressed, it is still a nay from me.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Of course if all alcoholic drinks were consumed in pubs and clubs then they could be on draft, saving bottles in the first place, or ensuring they were returned at source.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Did the Greens not do this a few terms ago?

    I like the principal but its needlessly bureaucratic with the barcodes and sending money to government each month.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Did the Greens not do this a few terms ago?

    I like the principal but its needlessly bureaucratic with the barcodes and sending money to government each month.
    I doubt it, because none of them mentioned that in the drafting process.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't understand why the barcode thing is needed.

    If all plastic bottles 25p and all glass ones are 10p, what difference does it make what the size/weight of the bottle is?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Qwertish)
    I don't understand why the barcode thing is needed.

    If all plastic bottles 25p and all glass ones are 10p, what difference does it make what the size/weight of the bottle is?
    So the machine can tell it's a British bottle, and a deposit was paid at purchase, and also for redistribution.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by O133)
    So the machine can tell it's a British bottle, and a deposit was paid at purchase, and also for redistribution.
    That seems like way too much effort. Why not just require them to label the bottle with a special QR code as well as the DEPOSIT £0.25 thing?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Qwertish)
    That seems like way too much effort. Why not just require them to label the bottle with a special QR code as well as the DEPOSIT £0.25 thing?
    Bottles already have a barcode, do they not?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by O133)
    Bottles already have a barcode, do they not?
    Taking Coca Cola as an example, many of the bottles are mass produced in Ireland or another European country and transported around Europe. On the label you will often find many languages to account for the many markets it may end up in and also a general 'Made in EU' instead of giving a country. Will a company like Coca Cola have to pay for the increase in manufacturing costs encountered in producing a separate British label and shipping it just to Britain? Production for Coca Cola in Germany is already more expensive and that's reflected in the base price without the added charge.

    It won't just be one barcode though. There will be two (one for selling in shops and one to recognise it's a special vending bottle). This is then multiplied by the vast array of sizes there are. The whole things become costly to implement and the effectiveness is unknown.

    Why do you even plan to get out of this bill?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Politisphere)
    Taking Coca Cola as an example, many of the bottles are mass produced in Ireland or another European country and transported around Europe. On the label you will often find many languages to account for the many markets it may end up in and also a general 'Made in EU' instead of giving a country. Will a company like Coca Cola have to pay for the increase in manufacturing costs encountered in producing a separate British label and shipping it just to Britain? Production for Coca Cola in Germany is already more expensive and that's reflected in the base price without the added charge.

    It won't just be one barcode though. There will be two (one for selling in shops and one to recognise it's a special vending bottle). This is then multiplied by the vast array of sizes there are. The whole things become costly to implement and the effectiveness is unknown.

    Why do you even plan to get out of this bill?
    I don't see why we couldn't have one barcode (although it will need to be separate one for the UK). The bill is intended to allow bottles to be sterilised and re-used rather than being recycled or just dumped.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by O133)
    I don't see why we couldn't have one barcode (although it will need to be separate one for the UK). The bill is intended to allow bottles to be sterilised and re-used rather than being recycled or just dumped.
    The barcodes would need to be the same to be identified by the vending machines who return your deposit but would also need to be different to allow date of production, bath, sorting, and price to be tracked in the manufacturing plant and at the shop where they are sold. It's unfeasible to assume the thousands of barcodes produced on bottles can all be inputted into the vending machine to be identified when returned. Similarly it's unfeasible to have identical barcodes of al bottles and all shipments ordered for the reasons listed above amongst other things. As the two barcodes would need to be different to perform different functions, please explain how you would combine these two barcodes into a single barcode that is the same, yet different?

    Who sterilises the bottles? The consumer delivers their bottles and has their deposit return, the government then has millions of plastic bottles on its hands. It could sterilise them and sell them on to the industry hoping the cost of buying back sterilised bottles is cheaper than the cost of mass production (the government will also demand a slight profit to pay for the whole scheme), or the government could sell unsterilised bottles back to companies and rely on the companies to sterilise bottles for reuse - again hoping the whole thing is cheaper than mass production. With the latter there will need to be more legislation ensuring companies properly sterilise the bottles plus inspectors to enforce the whole thing. Where are the bottles going to be stored in the time between collection from the vending machines and their reuse? Who will be responsible for ensuring cash is kept in the machines ready to return the deposits? Most trade these days is done with EFT. To stock the machines with the cash to refund the deposits there will need to be an increase in production, this will require yet more legislation in the forms of macroeconomic regulation to make sure the increase demand doesn't encroach on EFT. Any increase in the money supply could lead to inflation.

    How much thought have you given to the winder consequences of this bill and the extra legislation needed to make it workable?
    • Offline

      15
      (Original post by O133)
      Changes:
      * Plans for standardised bottles are removed; manufacturers must inform the Government of the shape and size of their bottles.
      * The deposit applies at every transaction, starting with when the bottle is sold by the manufacturer, so manufacturers are responsible for collecting the deposits.
      * The minimum floor area to require an RVM is increased to 300 m2
      Excellent, hell the first one was excellent this is just :sogood:
      • Community Assistant
      Offline

      21
      ReputationRep:
      Instead of this deposit can't you just negotiate with the supermarkets to give people extra clubcard points when they bring the bottles back. Even a bring 10 bottles get 1 bottle of water free.
      • Wiki Support Team
      Offline

      19
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by The Politisphere)
      The barcodes would need to be the same to be identified by the vending machines who return your deposit but would also need to be different to allow date of production, bath, sorting, and price to be tracked in the manufacturing plant and at the shop where they are sold. It's unfeasible to assume the thousands of barcodes produced on bottles can all be inputted into the vending machine to be identified when returned. Similarly it's unfeasible to have identical barcodes of al bottles and all shipments ordered for the reasons listed above amongst other things. As the two barcodes would need to be different to perform different functions, please explain how you would combine these two barcodes into a single barcode that is the same, yet different?

      Who sterilises the bottles? The consumer delivers their bottles and has their deposit return, the government then has millions of plastic bottles on its hands. It could sterilise them and sell them on to the industry hoping the cost of buying back sterilised bottles is cheaper than the cost of mass production (the government will also demand a slight profit to pay for the whole scheme), or the government could sell unsterilised bottles back to companies and rely on the companies to sterilise bottles for reuse - again hoping the whole thing is cheaper than mass production. With the latter there will need to be more legislation ensuring companies properly sterilise the bottles plus inspectors to enforce the whole thing. Where are the bottles going to be stored in the time between collection from the vending machines and their reuse? Who will be responsible for ensuring cash is kept in the machines ready to return the deposits? Most trade these days is done with EFT. To stock the machines with the cash to refund the deposits there will need to be an increase in production, this will require yet more legislation in the forms of macroeconomic regulation to make sure the increase demand doesn't encroach on EFT. Any increase in the money supply could lead to inflation.

      How much thought have you given to the winder consequences of this bill and the extra legislation needed to make it workable?
      The bottles would be handed back unsterilised to the manufacturers for free. Of course the sterilisation process would need regulation but surely there is some sterilisation of new bottles now?

      Also, 3(3) The deposit may be returned either in cash or electronic payment.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by O133)
      The bottles would be handed back unsterilised to the manufacturers for free. Of course the sterilisation process would need regulation but surely there is some sterilisation of new bottles now?

      Also, 3(3) The deposit may be returned either in cash or electronic payment.
      Great! The cost is even more than advertised then

      If a person is returning one bottle and wants the payment electronically, there's a processing charge plus the need for the government to negotiate a deal with providers to be able to refund the money on a card and use their systems. The companies are all US-based so the bill forces public money to be spent abroad. The processing charge will be more than the deposit forcing people to accept cash as the government wouldn't cover the processing charge at around 50p a time. The idea of having a car will become irrelevant.

      The scheme does not generate any money for the government so where is the money going to come from to implement this scheme?
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by O133)
      Bottles already have a barcode, do they not?
      Yeah but you're asking them to send you the barcode so you can add it to a database. Why not flip it around and create the barcode yourself and just get the manufacturers to print it on the bottle?
     
     
     
    TSR Support Team

    We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

    Updated: July 26, 2014
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.