Ten Cents Won’t Buy an Anti-Litter Culture

Ten Cents Won’t Buy an Anti-Litter Culture… not on its own.

Over the last six months in particular, litter has been making headlines with contention over litter reduction and recycling methodologies.

Litter is ugly, demoralising, unhealthy and an environmental disgrace. It’s a no-brainer that people shouldn’t do it. Following progress that came in leaps and bounds since recycling bins became a regular sight on Sydney streets in the 1980s and 1990s, trends are now lagging in terms of improvements regarding individual littering behaviour.

Several options are under discussion by politicians and environmental groups to address the issue. Should cash in hand for recycling be a factor? We wish that wasn’t the case.

If you pick up a child’s towel from the bathroom floor each time they shower, there will be a disregarded towel casually strewn in their wake every morning. Cleaning up after them might be a quick-fix solution to an untidy bathroom, but it doesn’t change the careless and messy child’s behaviour. Nor does passing the littering buck on to community groups, or kids looking to make some extra pocket money, upon whom falls the burden of picking up after litterers in public spaces.

Picking up the slack – and picking up the last of the unsightly cigarette butts, discarded paper and plastic detritus that make up over 50 per cent of the litter stream – requires behaviour change on a national societal scale to shift littering habits. It means doing the right thing for the right reasons, not for ten cents upon return.

Behaviour change will be achieved through campaigns to raise public awareness and vilify littering as the antisocial wrongdoing that it is, backed up by a rollout of ubiquitous, convenient recycling facilities for all recyclable products. Not through dollars – even though we expect they will be a part of it. It’s just sad that’s that how our modern society works.

One of the first Australian strategies to implement recycling was the Container Deposit Scheme in South Australia, introduced in 1977. The initiative was successful, for its time, taking beverage containers out of landfill and into recycling plants, in exchange for a 5 cent reward which was increased to 10 cents in 2008. Since then, movements such as the tremendously successful “Do The Right Thing” and “Don’t be a Tosser” campaigns throughout the last thirty years have replaced the need for financial incentive with the more effective and longer-lasting much needed awareness, education and ‘warm glow’ reward.

The challenge now is to take the good recycling practices that have already taken root in NSW households onto streets, parks and beaches. Extending recycling infrastructure into public spaces with a comprehensive network of public place recycling bins is the way to achieve this.

Despite having had a Container Deposit Scheme since 1977, South Australia is nowhere near the cleanest state in the country. It is Victoria that leads in the prevention of littering behaviour that is key to creating an anti-litter culture. Having achieved a reduction of almost 60% in litter over the past 8 years, Victoria’s approach – combining public awareness with convenient infrastructure – is working. Victoria is the lowest littered state in Australia.

Identifying litter hotspots and installing the appropriate bins – segregated for recyclable and non-recyclable items – capitalises on existing public opinion about littering. The right facilities remove the inconvenience factor in responsible waste disposal which leads to littered items tainting our living spaces.

Cynics might be relieved to see evidence that habits do not need the course of generations to become socially ingrained. Twenty years ago no one would have batted an eyelid to see someone walking their dog without a clean up after their pet availed themselves of public lawn space, simply kicking it into the gutter and walking on – until the 1980s and ‘90s saw a concerted push by local government to combat this. Public bag dispensers, products like clip-on poop bags, and council-issued penalties have seen almost all dog owners now picking up after their pets, because it’s the right thing to do and because of the stigma attached to leaving animal faeces in a public space.

Let’s say you’re out for the day, you buy a drink, finish it, and you are now stuck with an empty bottle. Consider the following:

Scenario one: You carry the empty bottle around for the rest of the day, taking it home (while ensuring you keep the barcode intact, otherwise the refund will be void), stockpile it in your spare bedroom, garage or backyard along with the other collected bottles, until you have enough to pile into the car, drive to the nearest collection depot and deposit for ten cent refund each. If you collected and deposited five bottles every day for a year, you could just about cover one week’s grocery bill. Of course the cost of the beverage containers would have to increase by about 20 cents to cover the refundable 10 cent deposit and the infrastructure and administration to operate the scheme, so in fact you’d be no better off.

Scenario Two: You walk about twenty metres to the nearest recycling bin and sustainably dispose of the bottle.

You’re either going to do the right thing, or you’re not, in which case you need to be taught to do so and you’ll need the convenient infrastructure to assist you in becoming a good non-littering citizen. You shouldn’t need a reward.

No one ever refunded ten cents for dog poo, and we won’t change the behaviour of litter offenders by picking up after them.

Cleaning up public spaces is noble, and recycling beverage containers is laudable. But these should be parts of the prevention, not a band-aid cure. A national recycling plan and bin network fits with social attitudes towards recycling in 2014, not 1977. It speaks to a future of better behaviour, socially entrenched and independent of financially incentivised cooperation. So let’s replicate the ubiquity and success of private property recycling with universally accessible recycling bins across the public spaces in which we live, work and play.

You shouldn’t do it for the money. You should do it because it’s the right thing to do.


39 Responses to “Ten Cents Won’t Buy an Anti-Litter Culture”

  1. February 25, 2014 at 5:10 pm, Chris Smith said:

    Education is a big factor, but some people will never be educated. We need INCENTIVES, such as a CDL to change some peoples behaviour. A CDL is also a way of rewarding people who do pick up after the litter bugs. I cannot believe you are serious with scenario two. How often are you still within 20m of a recycling bin after finishing with the container! I even saw some boys at a movie theatre leave their containers on the seat when the bin was NEXT TO THEM!!! A CDL is as much part of the solution as education and more bins, especially in regional and rural areas. It is frustrating that KAB seems to be on side with the beverage container industry and it is hurting your reputation with grass roots volunteers.

    • February 26, 2014 at 11:33 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi Chris, thanks for the feedback.

      We do not think that incentivising children or community groups to pick up after others will produce a long-term solution. We already have community groups dedicated to this – what we need to change is littering behaviour with education and public awareness as well as infrastructure. History proves that habits can change.

  2. February 25, 2014 at 5:10 pm, John Maine said:

    You make unsubstantiated statements to support your case for another “talkfest”. The CDS in S.A. does work – look at the data you sent out from the National Litter Survey.
    As a long term Tidy Town volunteer I can affirm that empty containers are not found in any quantity 20 m. from a recycling bin – they’re disposed of along roadsides and in areas where there are no recycling bins.
    Regulation and incentive are a proven way to combat community problems. In our area local orgs. such as Scouts could make good money from a CDS – Too much talk and not enough action.

    • February 26, 2014 at 11:40 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi John,

      If litter is not found near recycling bins, why not install more recycling bins so that they are near more places? Most people want to do the right thing, the NBN will make that easier. You are right in promoting incentive and regulation as successful methods – we do not think that 10c is the right incentive. Please refer to the link in our comment below for statistics on litter in SA and other states.

      • March 01, 2014 at 11:55 am, John Maine said:

        I have had a quick look at the statistics from the National Litter Survey.
        In South Australia the number of items of litter that are covered by the CDS was about 8% of total litter. In other states and the National figures the same methodology revealed that the percentage of litter items that would be covered by a CDS was 20% !!!!!
        One fifth of the litter nationally is CDS qualifying litter compared with one-twelfth in S.A.!!
        And that was when the container deposit in S.A. was only 5 cents , not 10 cents as at present.
        Need I say more

      • September 28, 2014 at 7:14 pm, Matt said:

        It funny how KNSWB is using statistics from the last 10 years to support their case against a 10c refund on deposits
        How about using case studies comparing pre 1977 rubbish numbers when the refund scheme was introduced to now.

        I lived in SA for 7 years and I see the difference on the Adelaide to the streets of Sydney.

        In addition to helping keep rubbish off the streets there are significantly fewer people begging on the streets as the homeless have an income generating opportunity by collecting and refunding cans and bottles that get discarded in bins.

        Yes, the 10c collection scheme even has a social benefit beyond cleaner streets.

        Finally, guess what? The price of a can of coke is no more expensive in SA than it is in NSW.

  3. February 25, 2014 at 5:55 pm, Michael Stevens said:

    Many people are selfish and inconsiderate and will not change. Rubbish is thrown from cars, disposable tissues are tossed after use and take away food and coffee containers are left within sight of a bin or tossed in the gutter from where they may wash into a harbour or sea. We need a range of measures to reduce litter as there is no single solution. Container deposits are an effective measure and should be part of the plan. The initiative works in Europe.

    • February 26, 2014 at 11:43 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi Michael,

      CDL provides no answer for tissues, takeaway food packaging or coffee containers. Nor for cigarette butts, which remain the most littered item nationwide and in SA. As you say, a range of measures are called for, and we want them to address all items in the litter stream. The NBN provides the best solution here, and also allows for specific targeting for problem areas and gaps in the chain.

      • November 03, 2014 at 12:06 pm, Su said:

        Plastic is the main concern in the triage of litter and the heartbreaking issue of non-biodegradable marine debris – and of this PET bottles are a huge proportion.
        Container deposit legislation is an essential workable tool in the kit to help reduce very real impacts of PET bottles to wildlife and Ocean health. Please stop selling us out KNSWB.

  4. February 25, 2014 at 8:00 pm, John H said:

    I have ridden a bicycle over vast distances – across NSW from Broken Hill to Sydney, around Hay, Balranald & Booligal, along the Darling from Broken Hill to Pooncarie & into Lake Mungo, around the lower lakes of the Murray River, through the Clare & Barossa Valleys & the Flinders ranges as well as around many parts of the Sydney Metro area.
    SA is by far the cleanest state I have ridden through. Kangaroo Island, two discarded drink containers in 600 KM. The entire length of the Torrens River through Adelaide, one discarded bottle on the downstream trip & it was gone on our return. Nominated charity bins in the Caravan Park we stayed in. SA & the CDS works!
    Travel now to the Cooks River Cycle Path in Sydney, tons of litter in the stormwater traps & even more floating on the tide as it ebbs & flows.
    Don’t rubbish our brains with talk of educating people to use the correct bin, that is the talk of the manufacturers & your major sponsors the Packaging Stewardship, not fact. It will cost the manufacturers to implement such a scheme, why do you think they oppose it? They are currently able to externalise the costs by passing it on to the ratepayers of every LGA in NSW who pay rates to have the Councils pick up the litter generated by the bottlers & packaging industry. Somebody pays & it is not the polluters, it is me & you, the ratepayers.
    I can’t help thinking the packaging industry could have got much more positive publicity over implementing this programme without opposition rather than fight on with vacuous arguments about educating people to do the right thing.
    KNSWB & KAB have done untold damage to their reputation and brand by bowing down to sponsorship that is simply blackmail to support the packaging industry. Stand Up, support a scheme that is proven to work & if the packaging industry doesn’t like it, tough luck, they can withdraw their sponsorship & show their true colours. Someone else will come to your rescue.

    • February 26, 2014 at 11:46 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi John,

      Please see our comment below, which addresses the points you raise and provides links to sources with supporting data. South Australia is not the cleanest state by a long shot. We have reached our stance on litter reduction methodologies through factual analysis, and based on this we support the NBN as more effective than CDL.

  5. February 25, 2014 at 8:16 pm, Peter Clark said:

    David’s response to this issue is very disappointing. I simply cannot agree and remain very concerned that the KABC is at risk of being branded as the ally of the beverage industry. Perhaps David, the KABC should, could, would work with the beverage industry to fund the thousands and thousands of recycling stations you seek to have installed throughout the country. If, as you suggest there will be a recycling ‘option’ at twenty metre intervals (surely you cannot be serious?), then I would revise the number of recycling stations needed to be in their millions – a blight and blot on the very landscapes that TidyTowns was established to protect. I’m sorry but this ‘solution’ seems to be nothing more than a very weak justification to deny the genuine and absolute need for action – action that is already 25+ years overdue. Please lead on this issue and develop, embrace and promote realistic, genuine and multi-faceted solutions to one of our greatest littering problems of this age. It’s time for more leadership and less talk.

    • February 26, 2014 at 11:48 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi Peter,

      Thanks for your feedback. I’d like to refer you to our comment below which addresses the concerns raised here and clarifies the important points.

  6. February 25, 2014 at 10:11 pm, Jolby said:

    Come for a cycel with me one weekend and explain how bins are going to fix waste on our rural roads – predominantly bottles, butts and McDonalds wrappers. Well placed bins doesn’t stop people throwing things out the window in rural areas, but placing a value on any item makes it less likely to stay discarded on the ground. Putting the onus back on the supplier and consumer is ideal.
    PS – KABNSW – I think there is a conflict of interest somewhere??

    • February 26, 2014 at 11:52 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi Jolby,

      Thanks for your input. Interestingly, two out of three of the problem items you mention here – cigarette butts and takeaway food packaging – are not covered by CDL. This is why we support a holistic solution. As for the rest, please read our comment below and I’d encourage you to check out the links for more detail on the options available.

  7. February 26, 2014 at 9:45 am, Nic Moodie said:

    Dear KAB. We are dissapointed at your position. Your bin network position appears to place a significant additional and ongoing cost on Local Government to collect and process the recycling stream. A sector already paying significant amounts to supply kerbside recycling services to households ultimately at a significant cost to Australian home owners.
    Also as im sure your aware even now large portions of recycling from public areas is discarded to landfuill due to high contamination rates. This is particularly a problem in Rural Australia as it has limited access to the large scale separating facilites used to separate out contaminated recyling from public place facilites. In turn this will result in significant proportion of public recycling bins being discared to landfill in rural areas. Compared to CDL this does not seem like a win for the environment or the community.

  8. February 26, 2014 at 11:35 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

    Thanks for the comments and discussion on the subject. There are a couple of recurrent themes here that we would like to clarify.

    KNSWB is not primarily funded by beverage companies. This assumption is based on misinformation. Our biggest single funder is Sydney Water – a direct competitor to the packaged water industry.

    SA is not the cleanest state. Not in terms of number of items nor litter volume. Victoria wins on both of these, and SA is in third place. Refer to the National Litter Index for stats.

    People raise the problem of rubbish like fast food packaging, tissues, cigarette butts or miscellaneous plastic – this is exactly why we need another solution that accounts for all litter. CDL does not address the entirety of the litter stream.

    The National Bin Network (our preferred alternative to CLD) is wholly funded by members of the packaging industry. The funding structure reflects the principle that those contributing to the problem ought to contribute to the solution. With CDL the cost of the deposit scheme is passes straight on to consumers through price increase.

    Long term chance will not be achieved by other members of society picking up after litterbugs. KNSWB supports a holistic solution that addresses all litter items, makes it easy to do the right thing, provides the education to back it up and imposes the cost onto industry. It is analysis of the facts that has led us to the conclusion that the NBN is the most effective and economical way to achieve litter reduction.

    These documents provide further information for those interested:
    National Litter Index: http://ow.ly/u04QU
    NBN and CDL comparison: http://ow.ly/u069M
    Fact sheets on the NBN: http://ow.ly/u06sb

    • February 26, 2014 at 2:09 pm, Chris Smith said:

      Bottom line is – a holistic solution should include a CDS as well as the other measures. As some others have said this is an “urban centric” approach which will do little in areas away from population centres as well as transferring costs to councils especially if the bins are in relatively remote areas. These costs are hidden and passed on to ratepayers. Let the consumer of the packaged goods pay I say!.

  9. February 26, 2014 at 1:29 pm, Christine Jeffreys said:

    I have read all the comments and still believe that CDL is a band aid solution for only some of the material that is littered around our country. We need an integrated program that incorporates community education campaign, enforcement such as fines for people who litter and the bins in which to place the materials when we are finished it. Instead of having to take it home, if it is a container then wash it and store it until I have enough to warrant the cost of petrol to return them to some depot. I think we should all consider the environment before disposing of any material. So much today is recyclable and we already have a recycling bin at home if there is not one when you are out.

    • February 27, 2014 at 12:04 pm, Nic Moodie said:

      Hi Christine. I may be goin out on a limb here but i believe youre the GM of the Packaging Stewardship Forum. True? Could you note that the community strongly opposes your position against CDL. I know you are committed to improved recycling outcomes. But on this one i think the PSF have the wrong end of the stick…
      Of course CDL is only part of a wholistic solution but its an important one. As a waste minimisation worker in a small rural council i know the proportion of our waste stream backwards and the costs to run resource recovery and disposal too. The National Bin Network figures just dont stack up in my opinion.

  10. February 26, 2014 at 3:20 pm, John Maine said:

    The results of the National Litter Survey which was sent to us by KAB in January showed that approx. 20% of the items collected in NSW, Victoria and Nationally would be covered by a CDS scheme. In S.A. the figure was 8% – how can you contest the figures in your own survey.?
    Stop siding with the industry and get back to your core group – the concerned residents of Australia. Keep Australia beautiful.

  11. February 26, 2014 at 3:35 pm, John Maine said:

    Your response to my initial reaction was that maybe we need more RECYCLING bins .
    My Question
    Where is all the LITTER supposed to go – you can’t put it in a RECYCLING bin. Are you suggesting more litter bins too?
    If so , who is going to pay for their installation, emptying and maintenance?
    I suppose it will be the ratepayer again.!!
    Why isn’t the initial source of the litter ( the industry) paying for the mess it is initiating?

  12. February 26, 2014 at 7:37 pm, John H said:

    I grew up in rural NSW during the time when their was a CDS & beverage bottles were refilled, true recycling in action. John Maine’s comment above is true, the manufacturers expect us to pay for the mess they create. By enacting a CDS, the cost will fall on the polluter at the rate of 10c for every container they drop & don’t return for a refund. Those containers will be picked up by those less fortunate or by Council workers & the money put in to council coffers. Simple economics, but the manufacturers won’t get any pity from me if it costs them sales, which is their only concern.

    • February 27, 2014 at 9:24 am, Nic Moodie said:

      Well said John, as the independent report developed by MRA on behalf of Local Government NSW examines CDL would significantly inprove the economics of kerbside recycling services. What we need is modern co-regulatory schemes that ensure manufacturers carry a shared responsibility for the waste their products generate – not one off handouts for the community and environment to soak up the ongoing costs.

  13. February 27, 2014 at 9:36 am, Nic Moodie said:

    KNWSB on page 13 of your information booklet you state that the Bin Network is Fully Funded (page title 13 Fact sheets on the NBN: http://ow.ly/u06sb). Can you advise how you have factored the ongoing disposal costs of the material. While initila capital spend for installation of the bins is significant this is only a fraction of the ongoing cost?

  14. February 27, 2014 at 11:29 am, Nic Moodie said:

    KNSWB for easy access i attach a quick link to the Local Governments NSW information page on CDL.

  15. February 27, 2014 at 2:48 pm, John H said:

    Whilst in Adelaide recently we observed a person with a bicycle. he had two huge plastic bags strapped across his back, chock a block full of empty soft drink containers. He may have stolen them out of bins or picked them up off the streets, but however he got them, they certainly weren’t going to end up in the Torrens River. No CDS scheme will ever capture all of the waste, just as no amount of bins will ever do the same. I would rather see the refund set at 20c to make it even more worthwhile to retain & refund you empty container & would love to see it extended to all forms of packaging, but perhaps that is what the Packaging Stewardship really fears.

  16. February 28, 2014 at 9:53 pm, Pete . said:

    Sadly, the CEO of KNSWBC has not yet demonstrated support for CDL nor a valid argument for not including CDL in a comprehensive approach to container disposal and management; rather it appears the KNSWBC is actively opposed to an otherwise excellent and proven initiative.

    Here are a few simple questions for David Imrie –

    * What are the specific reasons the KNSWBC does not appear to support the introduction of CDL for NSW?

    * Why hasn’t the KNSWBC included CDL in a comprehensive and strategic approach to littering in NSW?

    * Why is the KNSWBC at all concerned that a CDL will add 20c to the cost of each beverage sold by the beverage industry?

    * Please state how the seemingly unbelievable cost of 20 cents per container (for disposal) was determined?

    * Does the KNSWBC Board unanimously support the views expressed by the CEO in regard to CDL?

    What we need to see is a cogent, transparent and genuine position on ALL aspects of CDL in NSW from the CEO.

    • March 04, 2014 at 12:24 pm, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi Pete, David has answered your questions in an email conversation. The reply is copied below.

      From: David Imrie
      Sent: Thursday, 27 February 2014 2:57 PM
      Subject: Re: CDL

      Hi Pete

      Thanks for your email. To clarify one (pretty important) point. KNSWB is not anti-CDL. We just don’t believe that it is the best option of those being considered by government currently. For example, on a flight when you chose chicken over beef, that doesn’t mean you don’t like beef! That’s a very simplistic approach to a very complex issue, but it highlights that there are 10 options, and 10 options only – and that we believe one is the best of the 10.

      In answer to your questions:
      * What are the specific reasons the KNSWBC does not appear to support the introduction of CDL for NSW?
      There are ten options being considered by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) under the Packaging Impacts Consultation Regulation Impact Statement (PICRIS). All of this information is publicly available, and easily Googled. Given the masses of information on this topic we recommend that concerned parties conduct their own research. None of the options under consideration are a combination of CDL and a National Recycling Plan – they are all either/or based. We believe that option 2b is the most progressive of the ten under consideration, as it speaks directly to Australia’s rapidly growing recycling culture and addresses the entire litter stream rather than just beverage containers which form only a small part of the litter stream. KNSWB’s core aim is to achieve a litter-free state. The option an Australia-wide $100 million, 5 year industry funded plan to increase recycling and reduce ALL litter nationally, not just beverage containers. It is fully funded by industry, at no cost to the public. And – it delivers a close alignment to KABNA’s mission to reduce all litter.

      * Why hasn’t the KNSWBC included CDL in a comprehensive and strategic approach to littering in NSW?
      KNSWB is not the government or a regulatory authority. We don’t government policy, strategy or legislation. The NSW EPA is currently developing a NSW Litter Prevention Plan.

      * Why is the KNSWBC at all concerned that a CDL will add 20c to the cost of each beverage sold by the beverage industry?
      Cost will be passed onto consumer. We know of very few if any people who would be pleased with an increase in cost of living.

      *Please state how the seemingly unbelievable cost of 20 cents per container (for disposal) was determined?
      All published data refers to cost of infrastructure and resourcing to operate refund schemes indicates a cost of 10 cents per container more or less. Therefore, that cost plus the 10 cent refund equals 20 cents. All of this information is publicly available, and easily Googled. Given the masses of information on this topic we recommend that concerned parties conduct their own research.

      * Does the KNSWBC Board unanimously support the views expressed by the CEO in regard to CDL?

      * For the record, are any KNSWBC officers (including board members) shareholders or in some other way linked to the beverage industry? (you may choose not to answer that specific question).
      No. Although an incoming director has held senior executive roles in the FMCG sector, including with Coca Cola some years ago. Other directors have come from senior management roles in the waste management, accounting, airline, education, environmental and building sectors.

      I’d be very happy for you to be able to attend our Congress, even if only for the CDL discussion – it’s clearly something that you have great interest in. Feel free to get in touch with me directly to discuss.

      One final point – there is a lot of misinformation flying around that we are sponsored by Coca Cola. KNSWB receives no funding from CCA. In fact our major sponsor is Sydney Water, who with their TAP campaign is in fact a direct competitor of CCA.

      David Imrie

  17. March 04, 2014 at 4:06 pm, Michael said:

    You’ve got to wonder if anyone at KNSWB has ever done an audit of a public place recycling bin – unlikely I’d suggest. The massive contamination levels also render any recycling unlikely…
    Methodology of the NLI also highly questionable. CDL worked when many of us were kids and does work in SA but scares the packaging industry witless. It may not be simple to reinstate and manage but cant be worse than the status quo.

  18. March 06, 2014 at 10:48 am, Nic Moodie said:

    KNSWB I note you have still provided no response to any issues raised concerning the ongoing maintenance of the “Fully Funded” bin network.

    You state above in your email that you are concerned that costs will be passed on to the consumer in the case of CDL.

    Lets face reality, the “fully funded” bin networks costs will also be passed on to the consumer with none of the co benefits of a Container Deposit system.

    These costs will be hidden in Council waste disposal charges. This model seems unjust compared to a cost borne by the manufacturer and purchaser of the product.

    Again for easy access i attach a quick link to the Local Governments NSW information page on CDL.

  19. March 08, 2014 at 5:51 pm, Graham said:

    I support the introduction of a national container deposit scheme, and I encourage you to rethink your priorities on this, KNSWB, so that you can return to your core values by supporting it too.

    Cheers, Graham

  20. March 17, 2014 at 5:32 pm, Jo Mulholland (Ozcloggie) said:

    As a former assessor for Keep Australia Beautiful NSW’s Clean Beach Challenge I have been so impressed with the creative way in which artist Angela van Boxtel turns waste into art and is receiving credit for her efforts in e.g., the Manly Daily newspaper.
    I believe that KABNSW is missing out on an opportunity to publicise its efforts in a “fun way” by not finding a way to make use of her talents. . “From little things, big things grow!!”

    • April 04, 2014 at 8:29 am, Keep NSW Beautiful said:

      Hi Jo,

      That’s certainly an interesting concept! We can definitely promote her work through our social media channels. It’s a great idea what she’s doing.

  21. June 01, 2014 at 11:40 am, Peter said:

    I couldn’t bring myself to read this whole article, becase I read enough of it to see that it contains blatant misinformation.

    It clearly has the wrong perception of CDL, which is about preventing litter, not curing it. People do not throw away 10c coins. If the anonymous author can’t grasp that simple concept, then they have a serious obectivity problem.

    Recycling bins are not free, and servicing them is not free. Obviously Coca Cola Amatil and their ilk don’t want to go to any effort – they want to shift the effort and cost onto local government rate payers (declaration – I am a Councillor).

    Of course the cost of CDL will be passed onto consumers – but really, will anyone notice 10c (or a little more) on the price of a soft drink or bottled water as bought from a small shop or service station, where it is usually $2-$3? No, they won’t notice the cost, but they will notice their cleaner streets, as they return their container for the deposit.

    I’ve ever heard of barcodes being required – if you design a complex, single-jurisdiction system then maybe, but a simply “all containers, all states” system would not require such sophistication. You can design a system to fail, or you can design it to succeed. You seem to favour the former.

  22. June 15, 2014 at 8:10 pm, Joy said:

    Education of littering, recycling, rubbish has to begin in Pre school and through all school years and into Tertiary Education! It’s our children supported by adults that will change things. The Catholic Education Offices, the Department of Education Schools in All States, MUST include in their curriculum LITTERING, RECYCLING and the CONSEQUENCES of what rubbish can do to our environment form Yr 7 to year 12. Make it simple and make it work in the schools – use older students as LItter Monitors to monitor and teach our children how important it is to put RUBBISH in the bin OR take it home If I learnt this 60yrs ago in pre school and still do my duty today WHAT’S HAPPENED!

  23. August 12, 2014 at 2:21 pm, Bruce said:

    The problem is ignorance. Ignorance on the part of litterers, manufacturers, businesses etc. There is not enough broad scale education on what happens to that butt, bottle or plastic bag when left, thrown, blown or dropped. What happens mostly is, it is washed or blown into water catchments, the lowest of those catchments being the sea, let alone all the capturing devices alone the way.
    This is what needs to happen. Everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY(including the packaging industry), needs to be accountable for the waste they produce. Stop whinging about how much it will cost to implement this or that scheme. Everything we do, or don’t do NOW impacts the environment. Do something, stop talking about it! Pick up that plastic litter that you just tried to avoid, it may end up as part of a sea birds lunch. Until authorities have enough human resources and guts to start fining litterers, there will always be lazy, ignorant people thoughtlessly littering OUR environment. It is true that education starts with the youngest and most easily influenced people – children – just look at how successful TV ads have been. But education only goes so far with some people.

    Stigmatise littering.

    Champion recycling, re-use, and ANY or ALL schemes which get or keep litter out of the environment.

  24. November 07, 2014 at 10:25 pm, Gina Mascord said:

    It simply comes down to this – we all get education at school and not everyone ‘excepts’ it, but we all wont money….

    Yes there are other pollutants out there but there is a solution for plastic bottles and if it could be taken one step further, add another 5 cents if the bottle is returned with the lid.

    Take a walk along the high tide make on any beach and see how many bottle lids you can see.

  25. December 31, 2014 at 11:03 am, Fiona said:

    KAB digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole. The CDL is a good scheme, sure it won’t solve everything, as stated aluminium cans/ bottles/ containers are only a part of what ends up as litter but it will help to reduce these products ending up in our streets, waterways etc.

    KAB is in bed with the Packaging Stewardship and other big business, but of course this is understandable as they are partly funded by these players.

    McDonalds and Coke etc support of anti-littering campaigns seeks to put the responsibility of rubbish/ packaging disposal on the consumer rather than take leadership and claim part responsibilty for the fact they produce the packaging in the first place.

    Perhaps a tax. Taxes are generally good, if the funds are spent in the right way. The problem in todays world is that taxes are not advertised/ marketed well. I am a big fan of tax. All hail the tax God.