Original source · versioned page text
2018-06-27 SM - Attachment 1 to Item 2 - Directions Paper Transforming Queensland's Recycling & Waste Industry
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
Special Meeting
27 June 2018
Attachment 1 to Item 2
Transforming Queensland’s
Recycling and Waste Industry
Directions Paper
|1
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 45 sections
Section 2
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................... 3
Overall context........................................................................................ 4
Current initiatives.....................................................................................5
PART A—Waste disposal levy.............................................................6
Waste investigation.......................................................................... 7
The way forward................................................................................8
A waste disposal levy will come into effect in the first quarter of 2019....... 8
The levy will apply to all major waste streams........................................... 9
The levy rate will commence at $70 per tonne for all general
waste streams, with higher rates for regulated waste, and increase
by $5 per year......................................................................................... 9
The levy will have no direct impact on households..................................10
The levy will apply to a levy zone that covers the populated areas
of Queensland....................................................................................... 11
Clear exemptions to the levy will be identified.........................................12
Residual waste resulting from legitimate recycling activities will
have a concessional levy rate................................................................. 13
Operators of waste disposal facilities will collect the levy........................ 13
The levy will have a firm legislative base................................................. 13
Levy proceeds will go to waste, environmental and community
program funding....................................................................................14
PART B—Resource recovery, recycling and waste
management strategy......................................................................15
The way forward...............................................................................17
Queensland will progressively move toward a ‘circular economy’
to realise resource recovery opportunities and grow recycling sector
investment and jobs............................................................................... 17
New performance targets........................................................................ 17
Queensland will pursue landfill disposal bans on selected waste
streams where proven feasible...............................................................18
Queensland will adopt product stewardships schemes where national
action fails and community demand is evident........................................18
The Queensland Government will explore the development of
waste-to-energy.....................................................................................19
The Queensland Government will continue to engage nationally
on interjurisdictional waste issues and take a lead national role
where necessary....................................................................................19
Queensland will develop a best practice performance monitoring
system underpinned by a comprehensive waste database...................... 20
Next steps ...................................................................................... 21
Appendix 1...................................................................................... 22
2|
Section 3
Introduction
On 20 March 2018, the Queensland Government announced Importantly, the levy will also provide a disincentive to
the development of a comprehensive waste management the practice of long-distance transport of waste for
strategy underpinned by a waste disposal levy to increase disposal in Queensland. Queensland is currently the only
recycling and recovery and create new jobs. mainland state that does not have a levy on the disposal
of waste to landfill. The introduction of a levy was
This paper outlines the directions for Queensland’s new recommended in the independent Investigation into the
resource recovery, recycling and waste management Transport of Waste into Queensland report commissioned
strategy that will support the Government’s Advance by the Premier in August 2017.
Queensland agenda by promoting growth and jobs in the
resource recovery and recycling industry. The strategy Part A of this paper outlines the underlying directions for
will provide the waste and resource recovery sector with the waste disposal levy, including the proposed model
the policy certainty that has been lacking, resulting and the levy’s role within the strategy.
in significant under investment in new and expanded
resource recovery infrastructure in Queensland. Part B of this paper outlines the direction the Government
will take to reinvigorate Queensland’s waste strategy.
The development of a new waste strategy will fulfil the
statutory requirement under the Waste Reduction and
Key principles Recycling Act 2011 (the Act). The final comprehensive
waste strategy will be released following the statutory
consultation process required by the Act.
Queensland’s new waste management strategy will:
• Attract industry investment and innovation The strategy will also contain proposed regulatory and
• Create new jobs for our communities complementary measures, such as landfill disposal
bans and product stewardship programs that will help
• Have no direct impact on Queensland households
reinforce the effect of the levy in reducing the amount of
• Deliver long-term value to our environment waste disposed to landfill.
• Move Queensland towards a circular economy
The Department of Environment and Science (the
department) has established a Recycling and Waste
Management Stakeholder Advisory Group. The Advisory
The centrepiece of the strategy will be a waste disposal Group is comprised of peak body representatives from
levy. An avoidable charge, the waste disposal levy will be industry, local government and the housing and business
instrumental in changing waste management behaviour sectors. The role of the Advisory Group is to:
and practices in Queensland. It will reduce the incentive
to dispose of waste to landfill, make material that is • help shape the new strategy
currently disposed of more attractive to be diverted as a • identify opportunities for industry and
vital feedstock for the state’s biofutures industries and market development
create new industries that manufacture products using • assist in the design of the waste disposal levy
recycled content. A crucial element of the levy design will • advise on potential companion measures to
be measures that avoid direct cost impacts to households complement the strategy and levy
as a result of the levy.
• advise on potential challenges and impediments that
The waste disposal levy will provide a much needed may pose barriers to improved practice, and offer
source of funding for programs to support local solutions to overcome these challenges.
government, business and industry in reducing the
amount of waste they generate and increase recycling, The development of the waste strategy will be informed
and for the development of new markets and products. not only through feedback and advice from the Advisory
A portion of the funds raised through the levy will Group and as a result of public consultation, but also by
also be put towards programs to enhance the natural waste data reports and commissioned reports.
environment that all Queenslanders enjoy.
|3
Section 4
Overall context
Queensland is a major under performer in resource recovery by both national
and international standards and is the recipient of the largest quantities of
interstate waste. Annual data reported to the Queensland Government between
the 2007–08 and 2015–16 financial years demonstrates that Queensland’s
recovery rate has remained virtually unchanged over this time and Queensland
continues to have one of the lowest recycling rates of all jurisdictions.
The department estimates a 2016–17 recovery rate in Queensland of 44.5 per
cent. This is more than 30 per cent lower than the best performing Australian
jurisdiction - South Australia - at close to 80 per cent. To reach the national
average recovery rate of 61 per cent, Queensland would need to recover an
additional 1.5 million tonnes of waste, a 38 per cent increase on the volume
currently recovered.
Nevertheless, there is considerable innovation in Queensland’s waste and
resource recovery industry with many companies ready to make infrastructure
investments to grow the industry under the right leadership and policy
directions from Government.
It is widely recognised that the current Queensland Waste Avoidance and
Resource Productivity Strategy (2014–2024) did not deliver opportunities
for the resource recovery sector to grow and prosper. While the current
waste strategy establishes the vision and targets for waste management
and resource recovery in Queensland, it has failed to deliver the necessary
policy and regulatory certainty and stability to inspire new investment,
market opportunities and job growth for Queensland. This is largely because
the strategy is unfunded, relies upon the development of voluntary sectoral
action plans and is not underpinned by a market mechanism to encourage
behavioural change.
The disposal of waste into landfill without an incentive to recover resources is
a lost economic opportunity and creates avoidable environmental problems
such as additional greenhouse gas emissions and the need for long-term
management of contaminated land.
A 2009 Access Economics report indicates that every 10,000 tonnes of waste
disposed into landfill supports 2.8 full time jobs, whereas if the same 10,000
tonnes of waste were recycled, 9.2 jobs would be supported.
Greater resource recovery and recycling will significantly contribute to the
Advance Queensland vision to establish a biofutures industry that will
attract investment and create regional jobs by securing the feedstock these
industries need. Growing the resource recovery sector in Queensland will
directly contribute to the new high skilled jobs that the Advance Queensland
agenda is seeking to deliver.
The Government’s Queensland Biofutures 10-Year Roadmap and Action Plan
aims to develop a $1 billion biofutures industry by 2026. Waste provides a
valuable source of feedstock to the industry and the market signal provided
by a waste levy would generate additional availability and certainty.
Queensland has a unique opportunity to learn from international experiences
and build on the gains in other Australian jurisdictions in order to improve
practices through modern infrastructure, technology and innovation and provide
sustainable and viable domestic and local processing and market development.
4|
Section 5
In 2017, the Queensland Government commissioned
Queensland Treasury Corporation (QTC) to undertake an
Current initiatives
assessment of economic opportunities for Queensland’s Current waste management actions and initiatives have
waste industry. This assessment noted that Queensland’s focused on mitigating the impact of contaminants on the
current waste management framework is not supported environment, providing regulatory reform for industry
by effective mechanisms to overcome poor recovery rates. to stimulate future infrastructure investment and jobs
The absence of a waste levy is cited by QTC as an important growth, and an ongoing commitment to improving the
cause of investment uncertainty in the sector. With greater recovery of priority waste streams.
investment in resource recovery infrastructure, QTC
estimates 3000 direct jobs could be created. Collaboration and partnerships with business and
industry that deliver on-ground initiatives have been vital
QTC reviewed other Australian and international in achieving successful outcomes to date.
jurisdictions and found that best practice waste
management requires an overarching policy framework Both at the national and state levels, a range of wastes
to support the right investments, develop desired have been identified as priority issues. Key projects have
outcomes for the sector, sustain rigorous monitoring more recently targeted the most problematic wastes with
and compliance activities and promote best practice to a high level of environmental impact and community
government, business and the community. concern, especially those for which collection and
recycling presents domestic business opportunities.
QTC found that a waste disposal levy is a foundational
element in any jurisdiction with a high recovery rate. The Queensland Government is currently implementing
A levy has the dual purpose of: a number of initiatives that complement and support the
1. providing a market signal to reduce waste generation strategic direction of improved waste management and
and increase recovery resource recovery in Queensland. These initiatives include:
2. providing a source of funding for reinvestment into the • the introduction of a ban on the supply of single-use
resource recovery and waste sector and programs to lightweight plastic shopping bags on 1 July 2018
help reduce the amount of waste to landfill. • the introduction of a Container Refund Scheme on
1 November 2018
The QTC report also observed that an overarching strategic
• regulatory reform of the regulated waste and waste-
approach to waste management and resource recovery has
related Environmentally Relevant Activity frameworks
significant direct and indirect benefits including:
• strategic partnerships to deliver outcomes to improve
1. developing a regional approach to planning
management of organic wastes
and funding
• development of a Plastic Pollution Reduction Plan.
2. reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated
with disposal
3. reducing the unproductive use of land by providing a
more strategic approach to the identification of the
need of new landfill sites
4. developing high quality data collection to enable
more informed decision making
5. establishing key performance indicators (KPIs) to
provide for transparent monitoring and reporting.
A key observation from the QTC report is that levies in
other jurisdictions in Australia and across the world are
applied as part of a comprehensive waste strategy. This
includes a clear statement of objectives and a framework
for how the levy revenue would be used to promote
investment in new and expanded recycling infrastructure,
market development opportunities, and behaviour
change that reduces waste generation.
|5
Section 6
PART A—
Waste disposal levy
A waste disposal levy was first introduced in December 2011. The levy of
$35.00 per tonne applied to all general waste disposed of to landfill, with
the exception of MSW (Municipal Solid Waste—household waste collected
by or under contract to local government). Some exemptions also applied for
charity waste (on application) and disaster management waste. A discounted
levy rate also applied to the disposal of recycling residuals.
A levy zone comprised of 34 local government areas was established. Public
and private sector landfills within the levy zone were required to report on
the waste received for disposal and remit levy payments to the department.
To avoid the transport of waste for disposal to cheaper or lower standard
landfills in other parts of the state, the levy also applied to waste that was
generated within the levy zone and disposed of outside the levy zone.
In 2012, the former Queensland Government (2012–2015) repealed the levy.
In a two-stage approach, the levy was changed to $0 through regulation in
July 2012 with amendments to the Act to remove the levy provisions occurring
at the end of 2012.
During the seven months the levy was in place, $42.9 million was collected.
Levy revenue was directed to three funds: the Waste and Recycling Program
Fund, the Local Government Sustainable Futures Fund (administered by the Local
Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ)) and an Environment Fund.
Advance funding was provided to assist local government install weighbridges
and other infrastructure at landfill facilities. This funding ceased when the
levy was terminated.
The levy received considerable criticism and backlash from the business
sector because household waste was excluded from the levy.
The removal of the levy in 2012, combined with the inability of the New South
Wales (NSW) Government to restrict the long distance transport of its waste,
has resulted in more than 900,000 tonnes of interstate waste being reported
as received in Queensland in 2016–17.
6|
Section 7
Waste investigation
In August 2017, the Queensland Government The introduction of a waste disposal levy will:
commissioned the Honourable Peter Lyons QC, former • act as a price signal that encourages waste avoidance
Supreme Court Judge, to undertake an investigation into and resource recovery behaviour, and discourages
the transport of waste into Queensland. disposal as the first option
The investigation found there is a real prospect that the • provide an adequate source of funding for programs
quantity of waste from interstate will continue to increase to assist local government, business and industry to
under the current policy framework. establish better resource recovery practices, improve
overall waste management practices and sustain
The key recommendation of the investigation is that the Queensland’s natural environment
Government consider implementing a general levy on all • provide certainty and security of feedstocks for
waste disposed of at landfill in Queensland. advanced technologies and processing
On 20 March 2018, the Government released the report • facilitate industry investment in resource
and its response to the recommendations, including the recovery infrastructure.
development of a new waste strategy and re-introduction
To be effective and engender business, industry and
of the waste disposal levy.
community confidence, a waste disposal levy must be
The Queensland Government supports the re-introduction applied in the context of the new comprehensive waste
of a waste disposal levy on the condition there is no strategy described in Part B.
direct cost impact on households.
The Recycling and Waste Management Stakeholder
The investigation considered the comparable regulatory Advisory Group will assist in refining the design of the
frameworks across Australia and internationally. The waste disposal levy. A key design factor for the levy is
report also recommended that Government continue ensuring it incorporates measures to avoid direct cost
discussions with other jurisdictions on a national impacts to Queensland households.
framework to reduce the unnecessary transportation of
A significant communications and education program will
waste within Australia.
ensure Queenslanders better understand the benefits
In response to the investigation report, industry feedback of the levy including where the levy revenue will be
and recommendations, and international and national spent and how it will operate to meet long-term goals
best practice waste management experience, the and targets to improve waste management and resource
Queensland Government intends to re-introduce a waste recovery practices.
disposal levy that will be operated along similar lines to
the previous levy with some important modifications.
|7
Section 8
The way forward
A waste disposal levy will come into effect
in the first quarter of 2019
Significant preparatory work is required to implement the new levy. The
legislative and regulatory framework, including a detailed levy model, needs
to be drafted, consulted on with stakeholders and progressed through the
required approval processes.
Additionally, landfill infrastructure, such as weighbridges and security fencing,
needs to be made ‘levy-ready’. Industry and government information technology
systems need to be redeveloped and made able to ‘interface’ with each other so
waste can be measured and the levy owed to be calculated. Staff training and
broader awareness and education needs to be developed and delivered.
Stakeholders will be consulted throughout this process.
8|
Section 9
The levy will apply to all major waste streams
The waste disposal levy will apply to all general waste streams—MSW, Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste and
Construction and Demolition (C&D) waste—and regulated wastes that originate from a defined levy zone or are
disposed to landfills within that zone.
Exemptions and concessions for specific waste streams are discussed later in this Directions Paper.
The levy rate will commence at $70 per tonne for all general waste streams,
with higher rates for regulated waste, and increase by $5 per year
A waste disposal levy needs to be set at a level that is Table 1: Waste disposal levy rates
going to drive waste diversion and facilitate resource
recovery, without stifling business and economic growth. Levy rate
Waste classification
(per tonne)
Levies in other states vary considerably, with NSW having
the highest levy at $138.20 per tonne. This creates a Regulated waste: Category 1 $150
significant incentive for the transport of waste to lower
cost facilities. Regulated waste: Category 2 $100
General waste: C&D, C&I and MSW $70
A levy rate set at a minimum of $70.00 per tonne for
the disposal of all general wastes will ensure that an Regulated wastes are those wastes, as defined in the
appropriate level of disincentive is provided to move Environmental Protection Regulation 2008, whose
waste from disposal to higher order and value-add uses. characteristics mean that they have the potential to
This rate has been suggested for the following reasons: pose an increased risk to the environment if they are
not managed appropriately. Some of these wastes also
1. It avoids the high rate in the Sydney metropolitan have high resource recovery value and there are disposal
area of $138.20. A high levy rate would create a shock alternatives available. A higher levy on these wastes will
to the market and the current resource recovery help to address some of the cost imbalance between
infrastructure capacity may struggle to meet high disposal and higher order recovery options.
demand to divert material from landfill disposal.
However, $70 per tonne is still considered to be high Waste disposal levies in other states have annual
enough to send an appropriate price signal to the increments that increase the levy rate over time. The
market and will act as an immediate incentive to divert Queensland levy rates will increment at $5 per year over
heavier materials, such as concrete, from landfill. the next four years to continue to incentivise change
2. It is broadly in line with the rates in Victoria and South in material recovery, recycling and waste disposal
Australia, and would provide a strong market signal to behaviours and practices.
divert waste from landfill without the market shock of
Higher gate fees in NSW may maintain the incentive
a rate in line with NSW.
to transport some waste to Queensland. Gate fees
3. It provides a disincentive to transport a significant (excluding the levy rate) are determined by a combination
proportion of interstate waste to Queensland. of market factors and reflect impacts including site
management and disposal costs, competition and
relative scarcity of landfill space in proximity to Sydney.
This is why the new waste management strategy is also
proposing companion measures, such as landfill disposal
bans, to further reduce incentives for the transport of
interstate waste.
Further work will be informed through the Stakeholder
Advisory Group and public consultation processes to
develop the detailed levy model.
|9
Section 10
The levy will have no direct impact
on households
On average, a Queensland household disposes approximately 700 kilograms
of waste each year through the ‘red top’ kerbside bin service. The amount of
waste disposed increases to approximately 800 kilograms each year when
‘self-haul’ waste is included.
While it is proposed that the levy will apply equally across all general waste
streams, the Queensland Government has committed to avoiding direct costs
to households. This will be achieved in the following manner:
• The Queensland Government will provide an annual advance on levy charges
to those local councils that dispose of household MSW in the levy zone.
• The rate of the annual advance is proposed to be set at 105 per cent of
the tonnage disposed of in the previous financial year multiplied by the
current levy rate. The formula will be reviewed in future years.
• As an example, for a local council with 60,000 kerbside-serviced
households, an annual average of 700kg of ‘red top’ bin waste per
household and a levy rate of $70 per tonne, this equates to an annual
advance payment of around $3 million.
• If the local council makes savings in the amount of household waste that
is disposed of—e.g. through the establishment of a new green waste
collection service—any derived savings would be retained by the council.
• This provides local government with enough money to offset its levy costs,
avoid passing on costs to households, as well as providing additional
funds to invest in measures to recover MSW and encourage the progressive
reduction of disposal to landfill.
• Over time, it would be anticipated that the relative proportion of payment
would reduce as councils re-invest the funds to achieve greater efficiencies
and diversion.
This option is preferred to ensure an incentive for improving recycling and
waste practices applies to household waste while meeting the Government’s
commitment to avoid the direct costs of the levy being borne by households.
To exclude household waste from the levy would undermine the objectives of
transforming Queensland’s resource recovery, recycling and waste management
industry as many household waste streams, such as organics, will have
significant recycling value, particularly for emerging biofutures industries.
Excluding MSW would also undermine the overall success of the waste strategy
as it puts all the burden on small business and other industry sectors.
Research into waste disposal levies in other jurisdictions across Australia and
globally indicates that no other scheme excludes MSW.
10 |
Section 11
The levy will apply to a levy zone that covers the populated
areas of Queensland
A designated levy zone where the levy will apply is proposed. This recognises in part the special needs of remote
Queensland communities and removes the administrative cost of collecting, remitting and reporting against the levy.
In order to avoid communities outside the levy zone becoming ‘dumping grounds’, waste that is brought into the zone
where the levy does not apply will still incur the levy if this waste is disposed of. It is proposed that this also include
interstate waste if this creates an incentive to transport waste beyond South East Queensland. Further work will
determine the infrastructure and regulatory requirements to apply the levy to this waste and this may require further
infrastructure at non-levy zone landfill sites.
The introduction of a levy will create regional job opportunities through the attraction of investment and creation of
new markets for recycled material. A waste disposal levy also creates a much needed source of funding for regional
waste infrastructure programs that can assist in providing new or enhanced facilities to improve waste management
practices across the state.
Figure 1 provides a map of the proposed levy zone local government areas. Thirty-eight local government areas out of a
total of 77 will be included in the levy zone, which covers over 90 per cent of Queensland’s population.
Figure 1: Levy zone by local government area
Levy Zone and Local Government Boundaries
´
TORRES STRAIT ISLAND
TORRES
NORTHERN PENINSULA AREA
MAPOON ABORIGINAL Levy zone
NAPRANUM ABORIGINAL
Local government boundaries
LOCKHART RIVER ABORIGINAL
AURUKUN
COOK
PORMPURAAW ABORIGINAL
HOPE VALE ABORIGINAL
KOWANYAMA ABORIGINAL
DOUGLAS
MORNINGTON
DOOMADGEE ABORIGINAL CARPENTARIA MAREEBA
CAIRNS
BURKE TABLELANDS
CASSOWARY COAST
CROYDON ETHERIDGE
HINCHINBROOK
TOWNSVILLE
BURDEKIN
MOUNT ISA
CHARTERS TOWERS
WHITSUNDAY
MCKINLAY RICHMOND
FLINDERS
MACKAY
CLONCURRY
ISAAC
BOULIA WINTON LIVINGSTONE
BARCALDINE
ROCKHAMPTON
LONGREACH
GLADSTONE
CENTRAL HIGHLANDS
DIAMANTINA
BLACKALL TAMBO
BANANA BUNDABERG
BARCOO
NORTH BURNETT
FRASER COAST
MURWEH GYMPIE
QUILPIE MARANOA SOUTH BURNETT NOOSA
SUNSHINE COAST
WESTERN DOWNS
SOMERSET
MORETON BAY
TOOWOOMBA IPSWICH
LOCKYER VALLEY LOGAN
BULLOO PAROO SCENIC RIM
BALONNE GOONDIWINDI SOUTHERN DOWNS
0 100 200 300 400 500
Kilometres
| 11
Section 12
Table 2 contains detail on how the levy zone will operate.
Table 2: Application of the levy zone
Waste generated in Waste disposed in Levy applied
Levy zone rate applicable
Levy zone Levy zone
to waste type
Levy zone rate applicable
Levy zone Rest of Queensland
to waste type
Levy zone rate applicable
Rest of Queensland Levy zone
to waste type
Rest of Queensland Rest of Queensland None
Levy zone rate applicable
Other states Queensland
to waste type
Clear exemptions to the levy will be identified
To be effective the levy will need to apply to all wastes. However, it is
recognised that special circumstances may require some wastes to be
exempt, including:
• wastes resulting from a declared natural disaster such as a cyclone,
bushfire or flood
• wastes where disposal is required by a regulation, such as asbestos,
quarantine waste or fire ant infested material
• litter and illegally dumped waste collected by a local council, community
group or other organised participant involved in an initiative such as
Clean Up Australia Day
• waste that has been received by charities as part of donations or that has
been left in and around charity donation bins and stores.
12 |
Section 13
Exemptions are likely to be conditional and for the most
part will require an application.
Residual waste resulting from
legitimate recycling activities will
have a concessional levy rate
Exemption example—charity donation waste
The waste disposal levy will also recognise that legitimate
Exemptions for ‘charity waste’ may apply to a resource recovery and recycling activities still result in
charitable recycling organisation that: residual waste streams that may need to be landfilled, by
• is a not for profit group providing for a discounted rate or an exemption.
• is a constituted charity organisation in This rate may increase over time in order to encourage
accordance with the Collections Act 1966 greater efficiencies in resource recovery practices and
• has obtained Deductible Gift Recipient status opportunities for additional resource recovery to be explored.
from the Australian Taxation Office and
• actively and consistently operates a recycling Token recycling efforts in order to avoid the levy will be
and reuse program for the purpose of prevented by regulation by clearly defining a resource
emergency assistance and or the support of recovery activity and the eligibility criteria for the
the charitable purpose of the organisation. discounted rate.
The exemption would apply to levyable waste
that has been received as a donation but that Operators of waste disposal
cannot practicably be used for the purposes of facilities will collect the levy
the organisation. The exemption would not apply
to waste that is generated as part of the normal The operator of a waste disposal facility will be required
business operation of the organisation. to collect the levy when the waste is presented to the
facility for disposal. A waste disposal facility may be
A charitable organisation may apply for a ‘long term’ operated by, or on behalf of, a local government or by a
exemption (e.g. for waste disposed of over a number private company. The operator of the facility is required to
of years) or on an as-needs basis. The charitable remit the amount of levy owed, at a timing, and through a
organisation would be issued with an exemption process, to be determined in legislation.
certificate and the exemption certificate code
provided to the nominated disposal site or sites. Operators will also be required to submit data in relation
to the waste received at the site for disposal and what
was received and segregated for recovery.
Targeted consultation will be undertaken with specific
sectors such as charities (through the peak body the
National Association of Charitable Recycling Organisations) The levy will have a firm
to design a suitable and appropriate arrangement. legislative base
The exemptions system will be reviewed regularly and
Legislation is required to introduce the levy. It will make
changes made as appropriate. Exempt wastes and
provision for application of the levy and provide penalties
conditions around exemptions will be contained in
for non-compliance. Non-compliance issues may be in
regulation and guidance material.
relation to failure to collect the levy, failure to remit the
Other wastes will be specifically excluded from the levy payment or correct levy payment by the due date,
application of the levy, including: and failure to keep records.
• wastes that are disposed of on the site where they While the legislation will establish the levy head of
are produced, including, for example, red mud, fly power and framework, regulation will set the levy
ash, feedlot manures and waste rock from mining amount, the administrative requirements for collection
activities, and and disbursement, any future increases and the levy
• materials that are segregated for recovery not disposal collection zone. This will also include rules around
at a landfill site. stockpiling so this cannot be used as a long-term way to
avoid the levy. The legislation will allow for reviews of the
levy amount, levy differentiation and application.
| 13
Section 14
Levy proceeds will go to waste, environmental
and community program funding
Revenue from the levy will be available to fund levy administration, enhanced
compliance and enforcement activities and improved data and reporting.
It will also fund waste programs designed to achieve the strategy’s waste
reduction and resource recovery targets. Programs include statewide and
industry-specific programs such as funding to help local government prepare
and implement waste management plans, industry and market development,
and grants and rebate schemes. These programs are essential for Queensland
to meet the strategy’s targets.
Local government
Local government will be a beneficiary of the proposed levy with funding
available for activities. For example:
• waste disposal infrastructure upgrades
• education and awareness raising
• reducing greenhouse gas emissions from waste.
Individual councils will also benefit in the longer term as lower rates of
disposal of waste to landfill will reduce council operating costs and extend the
lifespan of local government landfills.
Small business and industry
Substantial business and industry funding will be available to assist
businesses implement programs to help reduce the amount of waste that
needs to be disposed of and to identify and develop waste avoidance and
resource efficiency practices. The expansion of existing initiatives such as
ecoBiz will provide a channel for funding and the development of targeted and
sectoral programs.
The levy will also provide the ability to create grants and funding programs
such as low-interest green loans that can assist the resource recovery sector
to upgrade infrastructure and develop new markets for recovered materials.
Levy funds will be used to stimulate further capital investment for expanded
and innovative technologies that process residual waste and support local
processing facilities in regional areas. This will help attract private sector
investment and boost the development of best practice infrastructure to
manage waste in Queensland.
The environment
Levy funds will also be used to fund new programs, such as incentives to
business to reduce their energy, waste and water consumption.
The community
Surplus funds from the levy will benefit the entire Queensland community
by supporting our schools, hospitals, essential infrastructure and other front-
line services.
14 |
Section 15
PART B—Resource recovery, recycling
and waste management strategy
In 2017, the department conducted a review of the A new norm, which includes changing and volatile
current Queensland Waste Avoidance and Resource commodities market and international policies that reflect
Productivity Strategy (2014–2024), as required every a growing concern about the quality of recovered materials
three years under the Act. The current strategy is based that are received, will impact on the development of the
on a voluntary approach and, while there are stated new strategy and companion measures.
objectives, targets and priorities, these are not supported
by a coordinated program of work or market-based One such policy, the China National Sword, has caused
mechanisms for behaviour change. significant concern in the industry. In 2013, China
introduced Operation Green Fence, which placed some
Discussions as part of the statutory review process import restrictions on low-quality bales of material being
confirmed that Queensland should replace the current shipped to China.
waste strategy with a new strategy that contains strong
targets, clear market-based incentives and companion In July 2017, China advised that further quality restrictions
measures to reduce waste and increase resource recovery were being introduced for low grades of recovered mixed
and recycling. paper, plastics and some metals with quality standards
of less than 5 per cent contamination being enforced. And
Stakeholder feedback also highlighted the commonly in January 2018, under the National Sword Policy, China
held view that the current strategy has not provided tightened these specifications further, reducing the level
an effective platform to drive improved practice nor of allowable contamination to 0.5 per cent.
incentivised industry investment in new infrastructure
or expansion of existing capacity. A consistent theme While the National Sword Policy does not ban the import
raised during consultation was that a new waste strategy of mixed plastics or mixed paper and cardboard, due to
must provide the overall strategic direction for waste changes over time to sorting equipment and practices,
management in Queensland. It must clearly prioritise the recent tightening of contamination levels makes
actions and identify companion measures such as meeting the export quality standards extremely difficult
landfill disposal bans, infrastructure development, for a number of facilities.
pricing signals and programs to assist in greater resource Despite the tighter restrictions, the Chinese Government
recovery and landfill diversion. is encouraging legitimate quality recycling and allows
The 2018 Queensland Waste Avoidance and Resource processed (pelletised) single-stream plastics to be imported
Productivity Strategy 2014-2024 Draft review report is under permit. Several companies have successfully applied
attached to this paper (Appendix 1). Submissions on this for an import permit while other companies responded
report and the proposals contained in this directions to the earlier signals from the Chinese Government and
paper are invited to help inform the development of a sourced other international markets.
new resource recovery and waste management strategy. The new strategy needs to recognise these changes and
The department will develop this new strategy in the challenges that they present, while at the same time
consultation with the Stakeholder Advisory Group, the identifying the local and domestic opportunities that can
waste and resource recovery industry, local government, be created from the implementation of a future-looking
business and industry, environmental groups and the and comprehensive approach.
wider community. Clear objectives and targets will be developed to ensure
The new strategy will focus on opportunities for economic performance and progress can be measured, monitored
and market development and job growth, and the and evaluated.
readiness and capacity of business and industry and the New regulatory measures will be developed to support
resource recovery sector to take action to transform. the goals and objectives of the strategy. These include
The priorities will also reflect current and emerging landfill disposal bans and product stewardship programs.
national and state priorities and the new strategy will
reflect the need to build harmonisation across states and
territories in key areas.
| 15
Section 16
These regulatory measures will work alongside a waste disposal levy to drive
higher rates of diversion from landfill. Where markets and infrastructure are
in place to process the diverted material, regulatory measures such as landfill
disposal bans will be incorporated into the strategy.
The application of product stewardship programs at a state and national level
can also be explored to support the goals and objectives of the strategy.
Programs will be developed to support priority areas and help direct
reinvestment of levy revenue to:
• facilitate waste avoidance, landfill diversion and recycling activities
• enhance economic development opportunities led by building advanced
processing and technology capacity
• facilitate and encourage waste infrastructure investment in key
regional areas
• promote regional market and job development opportunities
• support targeted compliance and education.
The key directions underpinning the new strategy are set out in the
following pages.
16 |
Section 17
The way forward
Queensland will progressively New performance targets
move toward a ‘circular economy’ New performance targets are necessary to drive a
to realise resource recovery substantial reduction in the amount of waste disposed to
opportunities and grow recycling landfill in Queensland. Targets are proposed as follows:
sector investment and jobs • 20 per cent avoidable waste disposed of to landfill
by 2030
The global economy is transforming towards a • 10 per cent avoidable waste disposed of to landfill
more circular economy. Queensland’s economy is by 2040
predominantly linear, which means that things are • Zero avoidable waste disposed of to landfill by 2050.
typically made from virgin raw materials, used, and then
thrown away as part of a ‘take-make-dispose system’ Under the circular economy model, wastes that are
commonly referred to as ‘cradle-to-grave’. The majority of disposed of to landfill or incinerated (with or without
these end-of-life products end up in landfill. energy recovery) are considered a material loss. The
strategy will drive recognition of the material value in our
In contrast, a circular economy is one in which products waste, and targets and actions will be set accordingly.
and materials keep circulating within the economy at
their highest value for as long as possible, through re- In 2016–17, more than 50 per cent of Queensland’s
use, recycling, remanufacturing, delivering products as municipal, commercial and industrial, and construction
services and sharing. and demolition wastes (collectively termed “headline
wastes” in the Recycling and waste in Queensland 2017
Moving to a circular economy encourages improved report) was disposed to landfill.
resource efficiency, and protects businesses from
fluctuating and sometimes volatile commodity prices, The new strategy will identify what needs to be done
thus providing a more stable operating environment for where and by when to work towards Queensland
manufacturers, retailers and consumers. becoming a zero avoidable net waste economy by 2050.
Zero avoidable net waste equates to eliminating all
Businesses operating under the circular economy model waste where it is technologically, environmentally and
create the opportunity of new revenue streams, markets and economically practicable to do so.
product lines, which help to further economic growth across
the state and align with the Advanced Queensland strategy. This target is intended to align with the Pathways to a
clean growth economy—Queensland Climate Transition
The circular economy is predicted to have significant net Strategy which seeks to achieve zero net emissions by
benefits for states and cities through additional revenue 2050 and acknowledges the role that waste has to play in
opportunities and the delivery of new jobs in the areas of achieving Queensland’s climate targets.
re-use, remanufacturing and materials innovation.
The mid-period targets set for 2030 and 2040 will
ensure that the strategy’s progress can be tracked and
performance monitored.
Additional targets to measure the strategy’s objectives
and specific priorities will be developed in consultation
with key stakeholders. Examples include increased
resource recovery and recycling and decreased per capita
waste generation. In the first instance, these targets will
be designed to ensure Queensland is on par with the best
performing states by the end of the next decade.
| 17
Section 18
Queensland will pursue landfill disposal bans on
selected waste streams where proven feasible
The department has already undertaken preliminary work to identify waste
streams that may be feasible in the future for landfill disposal bans. These
include tyres, e-waste and agvet chemical containers. Landfill disposal
bans on these waste streams will support the objectives of existing product
stewardship programs that already have well-established collection and
recovery networks.
Bans on the disposal of other waste streams including concrete and green
waste could support further industry development to process these materials
and the increased uptake of recycled content products.
Further economic modelling will be undertaken to demonstrate the economic
feasibility and benefits of implementing landfill disposal bans for other
waste streams.
Queensland will only introduce disposal bans where markets exist and will
allow sufficient transition time for infrastructure to be put in place before
commencement of the bans. The feasibility of implementing staged bans
across the state for certain end-of-life products will also be considered as part
of this work.
Queensland will adopt product stewardships
schemes where national action fails and
community demand is evident
Product stewardship approaches are being identified as a means for the
generators of the products that end up as waste to take responsibility for what
happens to those products at the end of their useful life.
Many product stewardship schemes across Australia are currently focused
on take-back and recycling. A number of these schemes have been operating
successfully for some time. There is now a significant chance to move
the stewardship discussion to the next level to explore the opportunities
presented around product re-design and lifecycle responsibility.
Queensland is taking the lead by implementing a product stewardship
approach to the Container Refund Scheme.
Queensland will continue to support national action supporting new
product stewardship programs such as the development of a scheme for
photovoltaic systems that is currently under discussion and is prepared to
lead the development of national schemes where national action is lacking,
or where state based action is better suited. For example, Queensland has
taken a leadership role in the development of a national product stewardship
program for end-of-life handheld rechargeable batteries and has piloted a
manufacturer-led sugarcane fertiliser bag stewardship program which has
since expanded to include other fertiliser bags.
Queensland will only consider state based product stewardship schemes
where there is no prospect of, or case for, a national solution and there is
evidence that the Queensland community demands action.
18 |
Section 19
The Queensland Government will The Queensland Government will
explore the development of waste- continue to engage nationally on
to-energy interjurisdictional waste issues
Waste-to-energy is a complex and diverse topic area.
and take a lead national role
There are a range of technological solutions that are where necessary
already available commercially, and a host of new and
emerging innovative technologies that may require It is recognised that many businesses, industries and
support to continue their development. waste and resource recovery companies operate across the
national market and streamlining regulatory requirements,
There is also a significant body of literature on waste- definitions and reporting will create a more efficient and
to-energy in reducing the amount of waste that goes less administratively burdensome operating environment.
to landfill, and the role that waste-to-energy plays in a
transition towards a more circular economy. There are significant opportunities to develop economies
of scale to overcome some of the market development
To align with the implementation of the levy, the challenges faced by individual states and territories.
department will develop a policy to promote the safe For example, the Queensland and Victorian governments
and sustainable delivery of waste-to-energy. This will be are leading work to implement the national market
developed in collaboration with key stakeholders across development strategy for end-of-life tyres. In this
government and industry. way, existing programs, markets and activities can be
leveraged to create a national driver for stronger landfill
Queensland will take on board the lessons learned diversion and advanced on-shore processing and markets
from other jurisdictions and seek to ensure the most for waste derived products.
appropriate types of waste are used for waste-to-energy.
Queensland will also continue to work with other
Fundamentally, the introduction of waste-to-energy jurisdictions on measures to harmonise waste
cannot simply be a replacement for landfill, but can be definitions, data arrangements and compliance activities.
a complementary measure in a society that achieves
significantly higher rates of recycling. While it is acknowledged that Queensland has one of
the worst resource recovery and recycling rates of the
The policy will seek to place limits on the use of Australian jurisdictions, the Government also recognises
certain types of waste as feedstock for waste-to-energy
the need to demonstrate leadership to drive national
technologies. Waste-to-energy will be appropriate for
harmonisation and markets that will ultimately help to
residual wastes where the best outcome is to recover improve Queensland’s performance.
remaining energy from the material. Residual wastes
have no economically, socially or environmentally viable There is significant opportunity to build on the initiatives
recovery or recycling options. that are currently under way, including leading work
with national retailers to explore options to reduce the
The policy will also consider the potential environmental supply of heavier ‘department store-style’ plastic bags
impacts, including odour and air quality concerns, and leading the development of a national product
and planning considerations of the various waste-to- stewardship scheme for handheld rechargeable batteries.
energy technologies.
Queensland has chosen to take the lead in areas where
there is:
• significant community support (such as plastic bags)
• an identified gap in the national agenda (batteries)
• a clear identified direct state interest (tyres).
| 19
Section 20
Queensland will develop a best practice
performance monitoring system underpinned
by a comprehensive waste database
Accurate data provides a strong foundation for business and policy decisions
about waste management and helps to educate and inform the behaviour and
choices within our communities. Quality data also helps local government
and the waste and resource recovery industry identify material flows and
commercial opportunities to manage waste in new and innovative ways.
The primary methods for measuring and monitoring the performance of
the strategy are the annual report on waste disposal and recycling, and the
triennial statutory review period for the waste management strategy required
under the Act.
Compiled by the department, the annual report and statutory review provide
analyses and insights into waste disposal, recycling and resource recovery.
Information is provided by a number of entities, including local government,
landfill and incinerator operators, recyclers, organic processors and
waste handlers. Solid baseline data has been collected since the Act was
implemented in 2011 to enable accurate point-in-time and trend analyses to
be undertaken.
In addition, Queensland’s waste and resource recovery data contributes
to Queensland’s State of the Environment report, the Commonwealth
Government’s national waste and national greenhouse gas emissions
reporting, as well as reports for relevant international agreements.
Maintaining consistency with other states and territories and the Australian
Government in the way data is defined and collected will remain a priority to
ensure the reliability, repeatability and comparability of Queensland’s waste
and resource recovery performance.
The web-based Queensland Waste Data System is the primary tool used by
the department to collect the data for the annual report.
The use of this web-based tool will continue and technological advances,
stakeholder feedback and industry changes will be incorporated to monitor
and confirm the performance of the waste and resource recovery industry.
In addition, waste characterisation, litter and illegal dumping, waste infrastructure
and other issue-specific surveys are also undertaken to gather objective,
attitudinal and behavioural change information that informs policy development.
Recognising the intrinsic economic drivers in waste management, there
are opportunities to identify and incorporate new indicators related to
employment and the economic value of the waste and resource recovery
sector. Exploring these could be a focus of future work programs.
20 |
Section 21
Next steps
The Transforming Queensland’s Recycling and Waste Industry—Directions Paper has been prepared to guide
the development of the Queensland Government’s new strategy that will, in part, help to support the Advance
Queensland and broader sustainability agendas.
The Recycling and Waste Management Stakeholder Advisory Group convened by the department will be invited
to help shape the final form of the strategy and the underpinning levy.
Public input into this process is also sought and public submissions are invited on this paper.
Your input into the development of the new strategy will ensure opportunities and challenges can be identified
to ensure the transformation and growth of Queensland’s recycling and waste manage industry.
Submissions are due by 5pm on Friday 29 June 2018.
Making a submission
Email: [email protected]
Mail: Directions Paper
Strategic Environment and Waste Policy
Department of Environment and Science
GPO Box 2454
Brisbane Qld 4001
| 21
Section 22
Appendix 1
Queensland Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity
Strategy 2014–2024 Draft review report
22 |
Section 23
\
Queensland Waste Avoidance
and Resource Productivity
Strategy 2014–2024
Draft review report
January 2018
| 23
Section 24
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
Prepared by: Waste Policy and Legislation, Department of Environment and Science
© State of Queensland, 2018.
The Queensland Government supports and encourages the dissemination and exchange of its information. The copyright in this
publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia (CC BY) licence.
Under this licence you are free, without having to seek our permission, to use this publication in accordance with the licence
terms.
You must keep intact the copyright notice and attribute the State of Queensland as the source of the publication.
For more information on this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en
Disclaimer
This document has been prepared with all due diligence and care, based on the best available information at the time of
publication. The department holds no responsibility for any errors or omissions within this document. Any decisions made by
other parties based on this document are solely the responsibility of those parties. Information contained in this document is
from a number of sources and, as such, does not necessarily represent government or departmental policy.
If you need to access this document in a language other than English, please call the Translating and Interpreting Service (TIS
National) on 131 450 and ask them to telephone Library Services on +61 7 3170 5470.
This publication can be made available in an alternative format (e.g. large print or audiotape) on request for people with vision
impairment; phone +61 7 3170 5470 or email <[email protected]>.
24 |
Section 25
Contents
Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................1
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................2
1.1 Background to the strategy ...........................................................................................................................2
1.2 Scope of the review ......................................................................................................................................2
1.3 Consultation ..................................................................................................................................................2
2 Implementation progress .......................................................................................................................................4
2.1 Progress against targets ............................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Other notable progress .................................................................................................................................6
2.3 Projects and policy initiatives ........................................................................................................................6
3 Findings .................................................................................................................................................................7
3.1 Approach to developing the Strategy ...........................................................................................................7
3.2 Strategic framework ......................................................................................................................................7
3.3 Implementation of the Strategy .....................................................................................................................9
3.4 Monitoring and evaluation of the Strategy ....................................................................................................9
3.5 Communication of the Strategy ..................................................................................................................10
3.6 Adequacy of the Strategy settings going forward .......................................................................................10
4 Summary .............................................................................................................................................................13
5 Recommendations ...............................................................................................................................................14
Appendix 1: Stakeholders consulted .........................................................................................................................16
Appendix 2: Projects and policy initiatives .................................................................................................................17
Appendix 3: Waste management strategies in other jurisdictions ..............................................................................19
1
| 25
Section 26
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
1 Introduction
1.1 Background to the strategy
The Queensland Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity Strategy 2014-2024 (the Strategy), was released in
December 2014. Development of the Strategy was led by the Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity
Strategy Steering Committee (Steering Committee) comprised of representatives from business and industry, the
waste and resource recovery sector, local government, and community and environment groups.
The Strategy sets out a vision for Queensland to become a national leader in avoiding unnecessary consumption
and waste generation, adopting innovative resource recovery approaches, and managing all products and
materials as valuable and finite resources. This vision is underpinned by five key principles, four objectives, several
priorities, and several state-wide and regional targets to be achieved by 2024 (as shown in Table 1).
The Strategy was intended to be implemented through voluntary action plans developed by the Queensland
Government, industry sectors, and peak bodies. Each action plan was intended to describe how the Strategy’s
targets and objectives would be achieved. Voluntary action plans were not required from councils and state
government departments that were already required to prepare waste reduction and recycling plans under Chapter
6 of the Waste Reduction and Recycling Act 2011 (the Act).
1.2 Scope of the review
The former Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) commenced the statutory triennial review of
the Strategy in early 2017, in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 2 of the Act), to inform the development
of a revised or new waste and resource recovery strategy for Queensland. This review, which covers the three-year
period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2016, has considered:
the progress towards achieving the targets, objectives and vision of the Strategy
the issues affecting implementation of the Strategy
the ongoing relevance of the strategic settings
opportunities to improve the Strategy.
1.3 Consultation
This draft review report has been prepared by the Department of Environment and Science (the department) and is
informed by preliminary consultation undertaken during March and April 2017 between the former EHP and other
Queensland Government departments, waste generators, the waste and resource recovery industry, environment
groups, and stakeholders, as identified in Appendix 1.
2
26 |
Section 27
Table 1: Framework of the Strategy
Queensland will become a national leader in avoiding unnecessary consumption and waste generation,
Vision adopting innovative resource recovery approaches, and managing all products and materials as valuable
and finite resources
1. Protecting human health and the environment to secure our future prosperity
2. Sharing responsibility for avoiding unnecessary consumption and improving resource management
Key principles 3. Recognising the economic, environmental and social costs of waste generation and disposal
4. Recognising regional differences and opportunities
5. Full lifecycle management of resources
1. Driving cultural 2. Avoidance and 3. Reuse, recovery and 4. Management,
Objectives change minimisation recycling treatment & disposal
Awareness & Education & Industrial ecology & Infrastructure &
communication training infrastructure planning planning
Avoidable Sustainable design Green procurement Appropriate regulation
consumption Production Research & development & enforcement
Partnerships, efficiency & cost Improved data to highlight Full cost accounting of
networks & savings to business opportunities all disposal
Priorities programs business
Regional collaboration & Disaster waste
Roles & Avoidable partnerships management
responsibilities for consumption Litter & illegal dumping
driving change Product stewardship
Market development & Technology &
appropriate incentives innovation
To be implemented through voluntary action plans developed by the Queensland Government, industry
Implementation
sectors and peak bodies
2016 Target
Performance indicators 2013 Baseline 2024 Target
[1]
General waste generation (tonnes per
1.86 1.84 1.8
person per year)
MSW recycling rate – State 33% 38% 50%
MSW recycling rate – metropolitan areas 37% 42% 55%
Measuring MSW recycling rate – regional centres [2] 30% 34% 45%
progress
As much as
Remote areas MSW recycling rate Not specified n/a
practicable
C&I waste recycling rate 40% 44% 55%
C&D waste recycling rate 61% 66% 80%
Waste disposal to landfill (tonnes) 4,675,000 4,483,750 3,973,750
Management of priority wastes Not established n/a To be determined
Acronyms: C&D = construction and demolition; C&I = commercial and industrial; MSW = municipal solid waste
Note: [1] The 2016 targets are not original to the Strategy, but have been calculated for this review, to enable progress under the strategy to
be measured. Each 2016 target was calculated by assuming that the corresponding 2024 target would be achieved in equal
annual increments (or decrements) from the 2013 Baseline.
[2] The regional centres are Darling Downs-Maranoa, Wide Bay-Burnett, Fitzroy, Mackay, Townsville, and Cairns.
3
| 27
Section 28
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2 Implementation progress
2.1 Progress against targets
This section summarises the progress achieved under the Strategy as of the end of Financial Year (FY) 2016 when
compared to targets. Progress towards a specific 2024 target is considered to be 'on track' if the progress as at
FY2016 equals or exceeds the corresponding 2016 target calculated in Table 1.
Figure 1 and Figure 2 demonstrate the changes in waste generation rate, landfilled waste tonnages, and recycling
rates against the interim targets, between FY2013 (baseline year) and FY2016 inclusive. Based on the analysis,
the following 2024 targets are considered to be on track to be achieved:
Municipal solid waste (MSW) recycling rate for regional centres (Figure 2)
Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste recycling rate (Figure 2).
The 2024 targets for the other quantitative indicators are not on track to be achieved. In the case of the state-wide
MSW recycling rate, there was no improvement compared to the FY2013 baseline. In the case of waste
generation, landfilled waste, and the recycling rates for metropolitan areas and C&D waste, the performance in
FY2016 has worsened compared to the FY2013 baseline.
Figure 1: Progress in waste generation (left) and landfilled waste (right) (lower values are better)
Figure 2: Progress in recycling rates between FY2013 and FY2016 (higher values are better)
4
28 |
Section 29
2.1.1 Action plans
As at December 2016, two voluntary action plans under the Strategy had been developed. These were developed
by the Waste Recycling Industry Association of Queensland (WRIQ), and the Australian Organics Recycling
Association (AORA).
Additionally, the former EHP released Queensland’s Litter and Illegal Dumping Action Plan (Litter Plan) in 2013 to
complement the anticipated release of the Strategy. The Litter Plan sets out the Government’s vision to create a
Queensland free from litter.
As at 30 June 2016, action plans required under Chapter 6 of the Act have been developed by all 22 Queensland
Government departments and 44 out of 77 local governments. Many of these action plans consider the targets,
objectives and vision of the Strategy and therefore contribute to its implementation.
2.1.2 Data limitations
In reviewing the progress against targets, it is important to note the following limitations and assumptions
concerning the underlying data.
Data coverage: The waste data represented in this report and in the Strategy were provided to the department
by reporting entities designated under chapter 7 of the Act and registered with the Queensland Waste Data
System (QWDS). Reporting entities include all 77 councils in Queensland as well as non-council waste facilities
that receive, sort, recycle, treat or dispose of at least 1,000 tonnes of waste in the previous financial year.
Reporting is not mandatory for entities that fall below this regulatory threshold of 1,000 tonnes, however some of
these facilities do voluntarily report these data to the department. At the time the review was initiated, data was
available up to the end of the 2016.
Missing data: Facilities that fall below the 1,000 tonne per annum threshold are not mandated to report to the
department, and so data is only captured where operators volunteer this information. Additionally, data is not
collected for activities undertaken by illegal waste operators or for illegally dumped waste that goes undetected.
The magnitude of this ‘missing’ data is not currently known.
Baseline setting: The baseline data used to set interim targets at the start of the strategy period includes waste
brought into Queensland from other states (interstate waste) and wastes associated with the management of
natural disasters (disaster waste). These source streams are the result of external factors that are not
necessarily a reflection of Queensland’s consumption and waste generation practices, however insufficient data
is available for the FY2013 year to allow the effects of these waste streams to be isolated. It should be noted
that there were several severe weather events in 2013 including ex-Tropical Cyclone Oswald and tropical lows
generated disaster waste that may have contributed to the reported rise in the per capita waste generation rate
(1.86 tonnes in 2013 compared to 1.64 tonnes in the previous year), and potentially influenced the baselines
calculated and reported in the Strategy.
Changes to allocation of waste materials to source streams: Prior to 2013, all green wastes were deemed to be
MSW. This categorisation changed in 2013, when green waste reported by local governments was deemed to
be MSW with the remainder (from other sources) deemed to be C&I waste. Further changes were introduced in
2015, when green waste not delivered by independent commercial operators was deemed to be MSW. The
categorisation of timber waste and scrap metal has also been refined over time. As a result of these changes,
the recycling rates for individual source streams (MSW, C&I, C&D) across various years are not directly
comparable.
Regional data: The Strategy includes recycling targets for SEQ, regional centres, and remote areas. However,
tracking and measuring the flow of recyclable materials on a regional basis is problematic, particularly when it
involves large companies operating in multiple regions. For example, the point of measurement and reporting
for an entity that collects waste materials in a regional centre may be in SEQ. This would result in a higher
apparent recovery rate for SEQ rather than the regional centre, where the waste originated.
Data confidence: Data estimation techniques have improved over time, for example, through the use of
weighbridges at waste facilities. As a consequence there is a higher degree of confidence in the 2016 data
compared to the preceding years.
5
| 29
Section 30
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 Other notable progress
2.2.1 Litter and illegal dumping
According to the National Litter Index1, between 2008 and 2016, the number of littered items and the volume of
litter reported for Queensland decreased by 28 per cent and 52 per cent respectively. In 2016, retail precincts
recorded the highest number of littered items while beaches and industrial precincts were found to have the
greatest volume of litter. Cigarette litter (butts and packaging) accounted for 43 per cent of the littered items, while
beverage containers were responsible for 41 per cent of the total litter volume.
The factors responsible for the reduction in litter and illegal dumping are not immediately clear. The implementation
of the Litter Plan and the Love Queensland - Let's Keep It Clean campaign are likely to have played a role in the
declining trend, but the specific contribution cannot be quantified at this time.
Figure 3: Litter in Queensland
2.3 Projects and policy initiatives
The department has implemented or commenced implementation of several projects and policy initiatives under the
Strategy, as listed in Table 2. As the majority of initiatives are pilot projects or still in progress, it is not possible to
quantify their potential contributions to the targets of the Strategy; rather, each initiative is described in Appendix 2.
Table 2: Project and policy initiatives under the Strategy
Objective Project or initiative
Love Queensland. Let's keep it clean (in progress)
Driving cultural change Container refund scheme (CRS) (in progress)
Introduction of a plastic bag ban (in progress)
Avoidance and minimisation Government policy on balloon releases (in progress)
Sugarcane fertiliser bag recycling trial (completed)
Organic waste recycling trial (completed)
Emergency lighting batteries stewardship (in progress)
Power tool battery recycling trial (completed)
Reuse, recovery and recycling
Tyre recycling demonstration project (in progress)
National market development study for end-of-life tyres (in progress)
Coffee cup recycling trial (completed)
Biofutures waste review (completed)
Regulated waste framework review (in progress)
Waste-related environmentally relevant activities framework review (in progress)
End of waste framework (in progress)
Management, treatment and
Online waste tracking (completed)
disposal
Landfill disposal bans (in progress)
Queensland Waste Infrastructure Project (in progress)
Operation TORA (in progress)
1
The National Litter Index (NLI) published by Keep Australia Beautiful, measures the number and volume of litter items across specific sites in
Australia as surveyed during November and May each year. In Queensland, the NLI measures litter across 151 sites (beaches, car parks,
highways, industrial sites, recreational parks, residential sites, retail sites, and shopping centres) covering an area of 224,004 square metres.
6
30 |
Section 31
3 Findings
This chapter presents the findings of the review, which were determined through preliminary consultations with
stakeholders from the department, the Queensland Government and the waste industry. The chapter is structured
under the key themes of the review, to present the headline comment, followed by a summary of the key points
identified during the review.
3.1 Approach to developing the Strategy
1. The industry-led approach to developing the Strategy relied on a consensus approach and resulted in a
Strategy that did not provide the necessary clarity and implementation details
The development of the Strategy was guided by a multi-stakeholder Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity
Strategy Steering Committee (Steering Committee) supported by five technical working groups. The large
composition and diversity of representation on the Steering Committee and technical working groups made it
difficult to reach consensus on the Strategy’s specific actions, resulting in a strategy that lacks implementation
details, concrete actions or specific commitments. Instead, the Strategy relies on these details being specified in
voluntary action plans. When these action plans were not developed (with the exception of the few that were) and
implemented as intended, the strategic framework essentially became ineffectual.
3.2 Strategic framework
2. Key elements of the strategic framework are not aligned and require further clarity
The key elements of the strategic framework include the title, vision, key principles, objectives, priorities and
targets. The findings for each of these elements are summarised below.
(a) The title of the Strategy introduces the concept of ‘resource productivity’, which is neither defined in the
Strategy nor linked to the other elements such as the objectives and performance indicators. This makes the
Strategy inaccessible to all but those in the waste and resource recovery industry.
(b) The Strategy’s vision, while aspirational, introduces concepts that are difficult to measure objectively (for
example ‘avoiding unnecessary consumption’), not underpinned by corresponding actions, and not aligned
with the targets. For example, the Strategy envisions Queensland as a ‘national leader’, yet other Australian
jurisdictions including South Australia, Victoria, and NSW have targets that exceed Queensland targets for
resource recovery performance. Stakeholders also suggested that the vision should reflect the complementary
economic, social, and environmental benefits of resource recovery and waste management.
(c) The Strategy is guided by five key principles to guide its implementation. Feedback suggested that the
Strategy’s principles would benefit from further refinement to ensure that the Act’s principles are appropriately
incorporated.
(d) The Strategy identifies the waste and resource management hierarchy (the hierarchy) as the important tool for
setting the order of preference for managing waste, however it seemingly sits outside of the strategic
framework. This could be improved, for example, by enshrining the hierarchy as one of the key principles.
(e) The Strategy’s objectives are broadly consistent with those of other jurisdictions and remain relevant for
Queensland. However, there is scope to simplify and improve understanding of the objectives by using plain
English (e.g. “reduce the impacts of waste” rather than “management, treatment and disposal”).
(f) Each objective is underpinned by several priority areas for action, which are largely still relevant. However, the
lack of implementation details around each priority is concerning, and consideration should be given to
whether the priorities could be further streamlined.
(g) The Strategy designates seven quantitative targets and one qualitative target to be achieved by 2024. The
quantitative targets were set lower than the existing performance of other States and will result in Queensland
lagging behind other states (Figure 4). In making this comparison, it should be noted that resource recovery in
the jurisdictions compared are driven by a landfill levy, which does not exist in Queensland.
(h) Targets should, in general, be ambitious but achievable. In this respect, stakeholders expressed the view that
the targets needed to be more ambitious, while others were satisfied with the current settings, preferring to see
a greater emphasis on implementation actions. Stakeholders were also critical of the lack of clarity and rigour
around the process for establishment of the targets.
7
| 31
Section 32
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
Figure 4: Comparison of resource recovery targets in several Australian jurisdictions
(i) The Strategy identifies five priority waste streams, which have potentially high risk associated with landfill
disposal (such as high toxicity or greenhouse gas emissions), social impacts (such as community concern or
amenity), or for which recovery would present resource savings or business opportunities. Priority materials
are identified for each waste stream. Some stakeholders were of the view that the classification of priority
wastes under the Queensland Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity Strategy 2014–2024 required
review and streamlining. Matters suggested for consideration include:
improving consistency by listing all priority waste materials or products by type (e.g. ‘mattresses’), instead
of by sector (e.g. ‘mining and industry development’ waste)
providing a secondary classification for waste materials or products (e.g. CRS plastics)
flagging priority materials which are currently covered under the end of waste framework.
(j) Chapter 4 of the Act enables the Queensland Government to gazette a ‘priority statement’ that identifies
priority wastes or priority products. The priority wastes listed in the Strategy have not undergone the gazettal
process prescribed under the Act. Doing so will ultimately strengthen the case for action on priority wastes and
allow for robust consultation with industry and the community.
3. The Strategy misses the opportunity to take advantage of potential synergies with other major sector
strategies and plans
The intended contributions of the Strategy to the goals and objectives of The Queensland Plan are well articulated.
Less so, are the links, potential synergies and opportunities between the Strategy and other sector strategies,
although it is noted that some of these were developed after the release of the Strategy. These include:
The Advance Queensland Biofutures 10-year Roadmap and Action Plan, which sets a vision for a $1 billion
sustainable and export-oriented industrial biotechnology and bioproducts sector that is focused on the
development and manufacturing of products from sustainable organic and/or waste resources, rather than fossil
fuels2
the Reef 2050 Long-Term Sustainability Plan3, which identifies marine debris and land-based sources of wastes
as major reef threats
the Queensland Climate Adaption Strategy 2017-20304, which encourages integrating climate adaptation
consideration into policies
the Queensland Climate Transition Strategy 5, which outlines the path to a low carbon economy.
Leveraging these broader efforts across government could help to achieve greater resource recovery and waste
management outcomes. This view was shared by some stakeholders who felt that better harmonisation and
2
Source: https://statedevelopment.qld.gov.au/resources/plan/biofutures/biofutures-10yr-roadmap-actionplan.pdf
3
Source: http://www.environment.gov.au/marine/gbr/long-term-sustainability-plan
4
Source: http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/assets/documents/climate/qld-climate-adaptation-strategy.pdf
5
Source: http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/assets/documents/climate/qld-climate-transition-strategy.pdf
8
32 |
Section 33
integration of the Strategy settings with other whole-of-government policy settings and strategies, and greater
coordination across the responsible departments and agencies could be improved.
3.3 Implementation of the Strategy
4. The implementation of the Strategy was hindered when action plans did not eventuate as intended
There are several issues with reliance on voluntary action plans to implement the Strategy:
All stakeholders expressed dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of voluntary action plans as the implementation
mechanism for the Strategy. Stakeholder feedback included:
disappointment with the perceived lack of clarity around the specific roles and responsibilities of stakeholders
in developing the plans, and lack of guidance materials on action plan development
misunderstandings about whether individual entities (e.g. councils) were each responsible for achieving the
targets stipulated in the Strategy
concerns about the lack of visibility given by government to action plans that were developed.
Industry stakeholders called for a more flexible approach, noting that there was little value to some companies
in developing a separate action plan since waste and resource recovery initiatives were already being
implemented through environmental management plans and other plans.
The cycle of developing multiple voluntary action plans as intended could place a significant time and resource
burden on the Queensland Government, as it would require multiple meetings and discussions with each sector
or organisation to negotiate and agree on the actions, roles and responsibilities of each party. Further, as the
needs of each sector/organisation are different, the process would require careful management to ensure that
the government’s efforts are not spread too thinly across multiple action plans.
5. There is no formal mechanism in place to provide implementation oversight and to support coordination and
engagement with stakeholders
Although the Strategy was developed using an industry-led approach with a strong emphasis on shared
responsibility, the department has sole responsibility for overseeing its implementation. There is no governance
structure in place to provide Strategy implementation oversight, or to facilitate and support broader coordination
and engagement with stakeholders.
To improve implementation of the Strategy, consideration should be given to establishing a high-level Strategy
advisory group, ideally comprised of representatives from state and local governments and the waste and resource
recovery industry. This group would enable stakeholders to participate in the Strategy implementation process at
the highest level and would also contribute to strengthening the working relationships between the department and
various stakeholders. Similar groups are often successfully established by the department at the project level to
guide implementation of specific projects or initiatives (e.g. CRS Implementation Advisory Group).
3.4 Monitoring and evaluation of the Strategy
6. The Strategy lacks a formal monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework
‘Monitoring’ typically involves tracking the achievement of activities and outputs, and to a lesser degree,
intermediate outcomes. In contrast, evaluation (such as this review) takes place at specific moments, and permits a
strategy’s progress (at the outcome and impact levels) to be assessed over a longer period of time. A good
monitoring and evaluation framework should clearly outline how each activity and expected outcome relates to and
facilitates the achievement of each objective, and how objectives relate to each other and the ultimate goal. High
quality data should also be available to support an effective monitoring and evaluation framework.
The monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework is described in the “How will progress be measured?” chapter
of the Strategy. It consists solely of a set of five outcome-based measures or indicators linked to source streams.
There is insufficient implementation details in the Strategy (e.g. activities, outputs, intermediate outcomes) which
likely hindered the development of a contemporary monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework. Other short-
comings of the monitoring and evaluation framework include the following:
The performance indicators were not defined, even though they carry unique meanings that differ from their
common or ordinary definitions. For example, the term ‘recycling' as used in the Strategy encompasses all the
9
| 33
Section 34
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
waste recovered through recycling (i.e. manufacturing into the same or similar products), reprocessing (e.g.
composting), stockpiling for future use, and energy recovery.
Some stakeholders made a specific recommendation to consider ‘domestic kerbside waste’ as an additional
indicator that could provide a more accurate measure of household waste recycling trends compared to the
‘MSW recycling rate’ which includes the waste from public litter bins, street sweepings, and clean-up activities.
The validity and usefulness of regional recycling indicators are uncertain given the difficulties involved in
tracking and reporting the flow of waste and recovered resources across the state (section 2.1.2).
The Strategy’s baseline may have been distorted by waste generation associated with severe weather events
during FY2013, as well as by waste imported into Queensland from other states (section 2.1.2). The baseline
should be established using a suitable method that normalises the impacts of one-off or special events such as
major disaster waste generation, interstate waste, and other seasonal variations in waste generation such as
large amounts of green waste generated during exceptionally wet years.
In view of these shortcomings, the Strategy requires a more comprehensive and robust monitoring and evaluation
framework. In parallel, the waste data framework could be further enhanced to ensure that the information collected
to support monitoring and evaluation of the Strategy is normalised, accurate and relevant.
3.5 Communication of the Strategy
7. The release and implementation of the Strategy may not have been communicated well to all stakeholders
Several stakeholders questioned the validity of the Strategy, citing a lack of awareness of the Strategy.
In terms of general communication during implementation the Strategy, some stakeholders cited the need for more
strategic communication from government on the benefits of waste management to businesses and the
manufacturing sector in terms of improving resource efficiency, productivity and competitiveness.
3.6 Adequacy of the Strategy settings going forward
8. The industry-led Strategy lacks effective measures to reverse the current negative trends and to achieve the
waste reduction, resource recovery and landfill disposal targets
The available data suggests that the amount of solid waste generated per person is increasing (9.1 per cent over
eight years), while the overall resource recovery rate has virtually stalled over the same period (1.3 per cent
increase over eight years). The Strategy does not identify specific interventions or incentives to address these
negative trends. For example, there are no incentives to reduce state-wide waste generation and drive resource
recovery, to overcome the barriers of scale and distance associated with resource recovery in remote areas, to
encourage greater household participation in kerbside recycling, or to encourage investment in resource recovery
infrastructure.
Incentives for resource recovery
The lack of incentives under the Strategy compounded by an uncertain policy environment were a recurring
issue raised by stakeholders. Industry stakeholders indicated that the repeal of the Queensland landfill levy in
July 2012—seven months after its introduction—undermined investor confidence and created a barrier to future
infrastructure investments. For example, several operators established C&D waste recycling facilities when the
landfill levy was rolled out, only to scale back or abandon operations when the levy was repealed.
There was a strong call from stakeholders to reintroduce a landfill levy to incentivise the waste and resource
recovery industry and boost resource recovery rates, and introduce landfill bans for certain recoverable material
streams to eliminate the disposal option, with regulations to limit the stockpiling of banned materials.
Viable markets for recovered resources
The combined (MSW, C&I, and C&D) recovery rate has only increased by 1.3 per cent since FY2008, which
suggests that there has been no appreciable change in the demand for secondary resources. Stakeholders called
for greater leadership and support from the Queensland Government to develop the markets that would encourage
the recovery, enhancement, marketing, and use of resources from waste. In particular, there was a strong call for:
state and local government to adopt and enforce green procurement practices that mandate, or set targets for
the use of secondary resources in government projects and operations
10
34 |
Section 35
developing local markets in close proximity to the recovered resources, particularly in remote areas, which
would reduce prohibitive transportation costs for both the waste and the recovered resource.
market development to be supported by landfill bans to eliminate the cheap disposal option, and regulations to
limit stockpiling of banned materials. Organic waste, tyres, mattresses and glass were given as examples of
waste types which would benefit from stronger government-led market development.
Waste management and resource recovery infrastructure capacity
In 2015, Arcadis Australia Pacific (Arcadis) was engaged by the former EHP to undertake a comprehensive
assessment of waste infrastructure capacity across Queensland, including the capacity that would be required to
meet the Strategy’s resource recovery targets.
The findings of the assessment indicate that several regions will require significant additional resource recovery
infrastructure to meet the targets for MSW, C&I and C&D recycling. Whilst the department has commenced the
process to develop a state-wide infrastructure plan, there is an obvious lack of measures in the Strategy to address
this critical infrastructure gap, for example through financing and incentive mechanisms, or through raising the
profile of waste infrastructure priorities under the State Infrastructure Plan.6
Regional and remote issues
Councils in the remote region of Queensland typically dispose of more waste to landfill, recover less resources
from waste, offer fewer waste management services, and are confronted by litter and illegal dumping when
compared to SEQ and regional centres. While the Strategy recognises the importance of regional development, it
lacks the interventions to address these disparities and the underling challenges faced by these councils, including:
significant distances to markets for recovered resources
difficult road conditions with limited accessibility in the wet season
limited availability of parts and skills for operating and maintaining waste infrastructure and equipment
in the case of the Torres Strait Islands, quarantine restrictions on the southward movement of goods (including
recyclables) to the mainland
small dispersed populations with limited financial resources
poor infrastructure and equipment for waste management.
9. The Strategy lacks effective interventions to reverse the current waste disposal trends
The amount of waste per capita going to landfill has increased by 2.2 per cent since FY2008 and by 5 per cent
since FY2013, partly due to increased importation of waste into Queensland from other Australian jurisdictions
(interstate waste), continuous improvement in compliance monitoring and enforcement by state and local
governments resulting in more waste entering the lawful waste management system, and continuous
improvements in the accuracy of data measurement (for example, through the increasing use of landfill
weighbridges).
The Strategy does not identify specific interventions or a credible pathway to achieve the 2024 target of reducing
landfilled waste to 3.97 million tonnes. Because the amount of waste going to landfill has increased since 2013,
achieving the 2024 target of 3.97 million tonnes would require the amount of waste landfilled in FY2016 to be
reduced by approximately 20 per cent. In order to address this widening gap, a range of regulatory, economic,
social and other incentives and disincentives must be identified and evaluated.
Interstate waste
On average, more than 465,000 tonnes per year of interstate waste were received by Queensland’s landfills
between 2014 and 2016, accounting for 5.4 per cent of the reported general waste total (Table 3). While the
majority of this waste is directed to a few facilities in SEQ where it provides an additional source of revenue for
waste operators, it also consumes landfill capacity that may shorten the operating lifetime of existing facilities.
The majority of stakeholders felt that more needed to be done to discourage interstate waste, and in this respect
called for the reintroduction of a landfill levy. Conversely, one stakeholder viewed interstate waste as an economic
and jobs opportunity for the waste industry and felt that interstate waste should be encouraged.
6
Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning 2016, State Infrastructure Plan Part A: Strategy
<http://www.dilgp.qld.gov.au/resources/plan/sip/sip-part-a.pdf> accessed 7 August 2017.
11
| 35
Section 36
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
In August 2017, the Queensland Government launched an independent investigation into the transport of waste
into Queensland, to understand the financial, economic and regulatory drivers that are giving rise to the transport of
waste into Queensland.
Table 3: Interstate waste disposal in Queensland
Parameter 2014 2015 2016 3-yr Average
Total general waste reported in Queensland (tonnes) 8,364,369 8,439,043 9,165,361 8,656,258
Interstate waste received (tonnes) 477,000 353,000 566,000 465,333
Interstate waste (as % of total general waste) 5.7% 4.2% 6.2% 5.4%
12
36 |
Section 37
4 Summary
The purpose of the Strategy was to improve resource recovery and waste management through shared
responsibility. However, progress under the Strategy has been slow and in some cases regressive. Progress has
also been hindered by the lack of clearly articulated strategic actions or direction for Queensland. Moreover, the
heavy reliance on implementation through voluntary action plans, which did not eventuate, impeded the Strategy’s
success.
Although the Strategy has been useful in guiding the business of the department, it has not been widely embraced
by other stakeholders, nor has it been supported by appropriate policy instruments to drive resource recovery. The
key findings of the review are summarised below.
1. The industry-led development of the Strategy relied on a consensus approach and resulted in a Strategy that
did not provide the necessary clarity and implementation details. The result is a strategy that lacks depth and
breadth to effect substantial improvements in waste management and resource recovery.
2. Key elements of the strategic framework are not aligned and require further clarity. For example, the
Strategy’s title includes a major but undefined concept of ‘resource productivity’ that does not connect with the
other elements of the Strategy, the vision does not align with the targets, the targets may not be sufficiently
ambitious, and further clarity around priority wastes is required.
3. The Strategy misses the opportunity to take advantage of potential synergies with other major sector
strategies and plans. The potential synergies and opportunities between the Strategy and other sector
strategies (some of which were developed after the release of the Strategy) have not been explored.
4. The implementation of the Strategy was hindered when action plans did not eventuate as intended. The lack
of mandatory actions and commitments in the Strategy meant that there was little implementation of the
Strategy when voluntary action plans were not developed as intended. Moreover, the cycle of developing
multiple voluntary action plans as intended could consume significant time and resources of the Queensland
Government.
5. There is no formal mechanism in place to provide implementation oversight and to support coordination and
engagement with stakeholders. Although the Strategy was developed using an industry-led approach with a
strong emphasis on shared responsibility, the department is solely responsible for implementation oversight.
6. The Strategy lacks a formal monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework.
7. The release and implementation of the Strategy may not have been communicated well to all stakeholders.
Several industry stakeholders were uncertain about the official status of the Strategy. Specific communication
issues were also identified which suggested a potential breakdown in communication of the objectives of the
strategy between state and local governments.
8. The industry-led Strategy lacks effective measures to reverse the current negative trends and to achieve the
waste reduction and resource recovery targets. The available data indicates that the solid waste generation
and landfill disposal rates are increasing, whilst the resource recovery rate has stalled over the last eight years.
There are no incentives identified to reduce state-wide waste generation, to overcome the barriers of scale and
distance associated with resource recovery in remote areas, to encourage greater household participation in
kerbside recycling, or to encourage industry to invest in resource recovery.
9. The Strategy lacks effective interventions to reverse the current waste disposal trends and to achieve the
waste disposal targets. The amount of waste landfilled per capita increased by 2.2 per cent since FY2008 and
by 5 per cent since FY2013. The proportion of interstate waste received has also increased in the last year. The
Strategy does not identify specific interventions or a credible pathway to reverse these trends and achieve the
2024 target of reducing landfilled waste to 85 per cent of FY2013 levels.
13
| 37
Section 38
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
5 Recommendations
In light of the key findings, the department recommends that the Strategy be replaced with a new long-term
strategy developed in consultation with stakeholders. The replacement strategy should articulate concrete actions,
roles, and responsibilities for relevant stakeholders to improve waste and resource recovery performance in
Queensland. Furthermore, the following specific recommendations, at times informed by the approach used in
other jurisdictions (Appendix 3), should be considered and explored in greater depth during the process to develop
the strategy.
1. The Queensland Government should take the lead in developing the new waste strategy with advisory and
technical support from diverse stakeholder groups as necessary.
2. Evaluate the full range of policy tools available to divert waste from landfill into higher order resource recovery,
drawing where appropriate on successful instruments used in other Australian and international jurisdictions,
such as market-based, regulatory, fiscal, social and other instruments that provide the desired incentives.
3. Establish a contemporary strategic framework to ensure alignment and links between the individual elements.
Ensure that terms and concepts used in the strategy are defined in plain English.
4. Ensure greater integration and linkages between the next waste strategy and other whole-of-government policy
settings and priorities including, for example, the Reef 2050 Long-term Sustainability Plan, the Queensland
Climate Adaptation Strategy, the Queensland Climate Transition Strategy, and the Advance Queensland
Biofutures 10-year Roadmap and Action Plan.
5. Include time-bound, high-level strategic actions in the strategy that commit stakeholders to act and that provide
a mandate for the development of action (implementation) plans. In addition to the plans already commenced
(infrastructure plan, plastic pollution reduction plan), the following priority implementation plans should be
considered:
Waste and resource recovery data framework: this should seek to ensure the collection and availability of
standardised, accurate, and relevant data in the immediate and longer-term, to support ongoing
monitoring of the state's waste strategy. This could include, for example, measures to improve the rigour
around data collection.
Waste education plan: which would contribute to a state-wide coordinated approach to waste and
resource recovery education programs including littering and illegal dumping. In this regard, Victoria's
approach to developing a Waste Education Strategy could prove insightful.
6. Develop a whole-of-government action plan that demonstrates ‘leadership-by-example’ in resource efficiency.
This could also serve as a template for other sectors/organisations.
7. Establish a high-level advisory group to advise on the implementation of the strategy. The advisory group
should ideally comprise of representatives from state and local governments and the waste and resource
recovery industry.
8. Develop a monitoring, evaluation and reporting framework for the strategy to ensure that the progress towards
achieving the goals, objectives and activities of strategy can be reliably and consistently tracked and reported.
As part of this framework:
Select performance indicators that better reflect the intent and scope of the indicator (e.g. ‘waste reported’
rather than ‘waste generated', and ‘recovery rate’ rather than ‘recycling rate’). Define indicators in plain
English and provide guidance on their measurement.
Establish and calculate a robust baseline for the strategy in a way that isolates the effects of disaster
waste, interstate waste, and seasonal variations such as fluctuations in green waste.
Develop performance indicators and targets subject to data availability, including for domestic kerbside
waste (e.g. kerbside disposal amount), and for specific waste streams (e.g. green waste recovery rate,
and concrete recovery rate).
9. Evaluate benefits from aligning the strategy development and review cycle.
10. Develop a communication and engagement framework to underpin the strategy and improve messaging and
communication with various stakeholders on the development, release and implementation of the strategy. This
should include exploring strategic approaches to improve and maintain good relations between the department,
14
38 |
Section 39
councils and industry on waste and resource recovery, and in particular around compliance enforcement. This
may include strengthening (and perhaps regularising) meaningful and strategic engagement with existing
groups such as the South East Queensland Council of Mayors, and the Local Government Association of
Queensland.
11. Develop a ‘market development plan’ to stimulate the demand for recovered resources. This could include
measures to develop minimum standards for recovered resources and products containing them, and to
mandate the use of recovered resources in public projects.
12. Develop a regional collaboration framework that identifies tailored solutions to the unique challenges and
barriers of regional and remote Queensland. The framework should explore regional approaches to
implementing policies, infrastructure and asset planning, capacity building and other initiatives.
15
| 39
Section 40
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
Appendix 1: Stakeholders consulted
The following table identifies the stakeholders consulted during the preparation of this review report. The
initial consultations were designed to enable collection of preliminary information to help inform the
content of the review report.
Sector Stakeholder consulted
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships
Environment and Heritage Protection
Fire and Emergency Services
Health
Housing and Public Works
State government
Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning
Natural Resources and Mines
Premier and Cabinet
Transport and Main Roads
Treasury
Local government Local Government Association of Queensland
Australian Council of Recycling
Waste Recycling industry Association Qld Inc.
Waste and recycling industry
Australian Organics Recyclers Association
Waste Management Association of Australia
Resources sector Queensland Resources Council
Agriculture Queensland Farmers Federation
Community environment sector Boomerang Alliance
Business Chamber of Commerce and Industry Queensland
16
40 |
Section 41
Appendix 2: Projects and policy initiatives
Objective 1: Driving cultural change
Love Queensland. Let's keep it clean (in progress). This campaign aims to create awareness of major littering
and illegal dumping sites around the state. It also encourages Queenslanders to take responsibility for their litter
and waste, and to report incidences of littering and illegal dumping.
Container refund scheme (CRS, in progress). Commencing in 2018, the CRS will provide a 10 cent refund on
eligible empty containers (sized between 150 ml and 3 litres inclusive) returned to an approved collection point.
Certain exemptions will be provided, in line with the exemptions in other states (for example, containers for plain
milk and wine, and large pure juice containers). The CRS should also contribute to the achievement of Objective 3:
Reuse, recovery and recycling.
Introduction of a plastic bag ban (in progress). The legislative ban, which will be effective as of 1 July 2018,
targets lightweight single-use supermarket-style shopping bags. Options for voluntary action to reduce the use of
heavier-weight ‘department store’ plastic bags will also be investigated. The plastic bag ban also contributes to the
achievement of Objective 2: Avoidance and minimisation.
Objective 2: Avoidance and minimisation
Government policy on balloon releases (in progress). Investigations have commenced on the development of a
government policy to restrict the release of lighter-than-air (helium) balloons from state government-owned venues
and events sponsored or coordinated by state government entities.
Objective 3: Reuse, recovery and recycling
Sugarcane fertiliser bag recycling trial (completed). A trial recycling program was conducted in North
Queensland between September 2015 and February 2016 to demonstrate the feasibility of recycling sugarcane
fertiliser bags. The trial was managed by Farm Waste Recovery, with support from the former EHP, regional
councils, fertiliser manufacturers—Incitec Pivot Limited and Impact Fertilisers—and the peak industry body for
Australian sugarcane growers (CANEGROWERS). As at December 2016, more than 700 tonnes of used fertiliser
bags (enough to manufacture 3,500 park benches) had been collected from 23 sites and employment opportunities
created for seven staff.
Organic waste recycling trial (completed). The City of Gold Coast estimates that food waste from its hospitality
sector accounts for about 50 per cent of the 39,000 tonnes of food waste generated on the Gold Coast annually. In
early 2016, the former EHP partnered with the City of Gold Coast to pilot the collection and recycling of commercial
food waste with a view to establishing a city-wide collection scheme and improving organic waste management on
the Gold Coast ahead of the 2018 Commonwealth Games.
Emergency lighting batteries stewardship (in progress). The emergency lighting battery pilot project
commenced in mid-2015 and seeks to develop a voluntary product stewardship program to increase the recycling
rate of end-of-life emergency lighting batteries in Queensland. The pilot project is implemented in partnership with
the Lighting Council Australia and complements national efforts to develop a national handheld battery product
stewardship scheme for hazardous and rechargeable batteries.
Power tool battery recycling trial (completed). This pilot program, funded by the former EHP and managed by
the Australian Battery Recycling Initiative, trialled the collection of power tool batteries (less than 500 grams) to
help inform the development of a national rechargeable handheld battery program. More than 500kg of batteries
were returned to participating hardware stores in the Brisbane City Council area over nine months, and a further
1000kg of stockpiled batteries were collected for recycling from the service centre of one hardware store.
Tyre recycling demonstration project (in progress). This partnership between the Department of Transport and
Main Roads and the Australian Road Research Board seeks to investigate the feasibility of increasing the use of
crumbed rubber modified (CRM) binder from end-of-life tyres in road applications such as spray seals and asphalt.
This initiative supports the national voluntary tyre product stewardship scheme, which is focused on the recovery
and recycling of tyres.
National market development study for end-of-life tyres (in progress). Queensland is co-leading a project with
the Victorian Government and in partnership with Western Australia, New South Wales and Tyre Stewardship
17
| 41
Section 42
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
Australia to prepare a national market development strategy for used tyres. The strategy is intended to map out
actions for short, medium and long-term prioritisation of market development opportunities. These actions are
expected to reduce reliance on export markets, and strengthen domestic tyre recycling capacity in Australia.
Coffee cup recycling trial (completed). This 20-day Brisbane-based trial resulted in the collection of 4,296
disposable coffee cups in the Brisbane City Council Green Square where approximately 700 people work. The
information will be used to help develop a national business case to attract investment into recycling this waste
stream (either by recycling into new plastic and paper products, or in energy recovery).
Biofutures initiative (in progress). The Queensland Government’s Biofutures 10-year Roadmap and Action Plan
(Biofutures Roadmap) includes strategies and actions to achieve its vision for a $1 billion sustainable and export-
oriented industrial biotechnology and bioproducts sector attracting significant international investment, creating
regional, high-value and knowledge intensive-jobs. Under the Biofutures Roadmap, a review of wastes in
Queensland that may be suitable for diversion from disposal to higher-order and more sustainable uses has been
completed. A further investigation into the policy and market development opportunities to encourage re-use of
waste currently going to landfill was also conducted in 2017. The outputs of these actions will help to facilitate and
attract investment in the resource recovery sector.
Objective 4: Management, treatment and disposal
Regulated waste framework review (in progress). This review aims to introduce a regulated waste classification
system that reflects the link between waste and the potential risk to human health and the environment. Four
regulated waste categories are proposed (in order of decreasing risk): category 1, category 2, category 3, and the
not regulated waste category.
Waste-related environmentally relevant activities (ERA) framework review (in progress). The review aims to
develop a modern framework for regulating waste-related ERAs that better reflects current waste management
practices and the environmental risks associated with each activity. It also seeks to identify opportunities for
improved waste management and resource recovery, industry growth, and where appropriate, facilitate the use of
new and innovative technologies.
End of waste framework (EoW) (in progress). The EoW framework provides the means by which a waste can be
reclassified into a resource, allowing it to be used for other purposes. As a resource, the material would be
considered the same as other non-waste resources and would not be controlled as a waste. This is intended to
encourage diversion of potential resources from landfill and into new uses.
Online waste tracking (completed). This online waste tracking system was introduced to facilitate rapid
completion (by industry) and analysis (by the department) of waste transport certificates that track the movement of
trackable wastes (schedule 2E of the Environmental Protection Regulation 2008). The online system enables an
equitable fee charging regime, reduces the administrative burden on the department involved in processing paper-
based tracking certificates, and provides more timely access to waste tracking information for compliance
investigation purposes.
Landfill disposal bans (in progress). A 2014 cost-benefit analysis of the implementation of landfill disposal bans in
Queensland identified that introducing a landfill ban for sorted concrete, tyres and MSW green materials would be
feasible on the basis that it would result in a net economic benefit over a 10-year period. Additional work is being
completed to evaluate the potential impacts of a legislative ban on the waste materials.
Queensland Waste Infrastructure Project (in progress). This project seeks firstly to improve understanding of
waste flows and existing waste and resource recovery infrastructure across the state, and secondly to develop a
series of long-range waste infrastructure plans for Queensland’s regions to ensure sufficient infrastructure capacity
to support the Strategy targets. A key outcome of this project to date is an interactive map of licensed waste
facilities that are open to the public.
Operation TORA (in progress). Implemented by the Waste Industry Compliance Investigation Taskforce,
Operation TORA is a coordinated compliance program to stamp out unlicensed waste management operators in
Queensland. Between August 2015 and January 2017, Operation TORA conducted 207 investigations into alleged
unlicensed waste operators which resulted in 69 enforcement outcomes.
18
42 |
Section 43
Appendix 3: Waste management strategies in other
jurisdictions
Overview
The following waste management strategies were analysed to identify distinguishing or notable features that could
help to inform this review:
NSW Waste and Resource Recovery Strategy 2014-2021 (NSW strategy)
South Australia’s Waste Strategy 2015-2020 (SA strategy)
The Tasmanian Waste and Resource Management Strategy (TAS strategy)
Victoria’s State-wide Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Plan (SWRRIP)
Western Australian Waste Strategy: Creating the Right Environment (WA strategy)
The jurisdictional analysis did not include a detailed analysis of the specific targets or strategic directions for each
state. This is because each state’s strategic settings are influenced by a range of factors which may not be
applicable to the Queensland context, including the way in which waste is classified, the accuracy and availability
of data, delivery of specific election commitments, and other political and socio-economic drivers.
To help provide context to the chapter, a comparison of the resource recovery rates of the jurisdictions analysed is
provided in Table 4. Based on this comparison, Queensland is the joint lowest performer (tied with WA) for
resource recovery overall.
Jurisdictional findings
The following noteworthy features were identified from the jurisdictional analysis. Where appropriate, these
features have been used to help inform possible approaches to address the overall findings of the review.
The objectives/goals of most strategies are typically around the themes of behaviour change, waste avoidance
and reduction, resource recovery, disposal, and landfill diversion. The TAS strategy is the only one that
identifies a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as one of its main objectives.
Most strategies specify numerical targets to be achieved by specific dates. Used to a lesser extent are
qualitative targets that describe the desired trend without committing to a numerical target (e.g. 'reduce the rate
of waste generation per capita'), and targets benchmarked against another indicator (e.g. 'the growth in waste
generation rate is less than the population growth rate' as used in the ACT). The use of qualitative targets are
useful when there is a lack of data to support the establishment of numerical targets.
NSW is unique among jurisdictions in that the governing law requires an expert reference group to set the NSW
strategy targets.
All of the strategies analysed specify high-level strategic actions or directions and allow the implementation
details (e.g. specific actions, timeframes and responsibilities) to be specified in annual business plans (Victoria
and WA), thematic implementation plans such as for illegal dumping or organic waste (Victoria and NSW), and
regional plans (Victoria).
Victoria and Tasmania are the only states that appear to have formal mechanisms in place to oversee
implementation of their strategies. Oversight for strategy implementation is provided by waste and resource
recovery groups consisting of multiple councils in Victoria, and the multi-stakeholder Waste Advisory Committee
in Tasmania.
19
| 43
Section 44
NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
Table 4: Comparison of 2014–15 resource recovery rates in Australian jurisdictions7
Rank MSW recovery rate [1] C&I recovery rate [1] C&D recovery rate [1,2] Overall recovery rate [1]
1 SA: 71% SA: 84% NSW: 74% SA: 77%
2 NSW: 59% VIC: 72% Vic: 73% VIC: 69%
3 VIC: 53% WA: 63% SA: 72% NSW: 64%
4 WA: 42% TAS: 59% Qld: 47% TAS: 50%
5 QLD: 41% NSW: 56% WA: 42% QLD: 48%
6 TAS: 38% QLD: 56% TAS: 1% WA: 48%
Note: [1] Recovery rate = (energy recovery + recycling) / generation; [2] The C&I and Overall recovery rates exclude fly ash
Victoria’s strategic framework is extensive and underpinned by the following:
seven 10-year Regional Waste and Resource Recovery Implementation Plans developed by statutory Waste
and Resource Recovery Groups
the Victorian Waste Education Strategy, which seeks to provide a state-wide coordinated approach to waste
and resource recovery education programs
the Victorian Market Development Strategy for Recovered Resources, which identifies interventions to
address the imbalance in the supply and demand for recovered resources
the Victorian Organics Resource Recovery Strategy, which aims to establish a vibrant recycled organics
market
a five-year engagement strategy that develops the key messages and engagement mechanisms to ensure
the right stakeholders are engaged appropriately throughout implementation of the SWRRIP.
The NSW strategic framework is also underpinned by several supporting strategies, including:
Changing behaviour Together: NSW Waste Less, Recycle More education strategy 2016-21
Draft NSW Litter Prevention Strategy 2017-20
NSW Illegal Dumping Strategy 2017-21
Draft Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Strategy 2017-2021.
7
Blue Environment Pty Ltd and Randell Environmental Consulting 2017, Australian National Waste Report 2016, Department of the
Environment and Energy, Canberra.
20
44 |
Section 45
| 45
Section 46
46 |
#31574
#31574