Council given powers to check waste bill door-to-door

enda1

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dubliners-will-have-to-prove-how-they-dispose-of-waste-1.1393650


Dublin City Council have enacted bylaws for themselves to allow for inspectors to demand proof of waste contracts door-to-door.

The apparent reason is to curb private waste disposal and only allow waste disposal to be performed by sanctioned companies.

I don't really have a major issue with the attempt to curb illegal dumping of waste as it appears to be a large problem, however I find the steps a swing too far in reaction.

Seems a rather draconian act and one eroding civil liberties. The civil liberties I refer to are two-fold:
The right to peace and quiet in your private property;
The right to not have to jump through hoops to prove innocence


What do you all think?

Kristopherus

Here comes another level of Nanny State:mad:

Andre Salmon

Im all for it. I presume they will just target the problem areas.
My office is on Amiens street and Im at the back looking out on to Killarney st.
Every morning there is a massive pile of rubbish dumped there.
To be fair its cleaned up by dcc quickly

AlekSmart

enda1 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/dubliners-will-have-to-prove-how-they-dispose-of-waste-1.1393650

Dublin City Council have enacted bylaws for themselves to allow for inspectors to demand proof of waste contracts door-to-door.

The apparent reason is to curb private waste disposal and only allow waste disposal to be performed by sanctioned companies.

I don't really have a major issue with the attempt to curb illegal dumping of waste as it appears to be a large problem, however I find the steps a swing too far in reaction.

Seems a rather draconian act and one eroding civil liberties. The civil liberties I refer to are two-fold:
The right to peace and quiet in your private property;
The right to not have to jump through hoops to prove innocence

What do you all think?

I don't see anything Draconian about it at all.

The Council are in a totally invidious position,being damned if they do and equally vilified if they don't.

It should be noted that this is a Bye-Law and as such fully compliant with the laws of the land.

However,ask yourself if the individuals responsible for the situation will be concened in the slightest about a Hi-Vizzed Inspector knocking on their door ?

My belief is that such a personage will be greeted with shrugged shoulder's,a blank stare and a "No speak English" sign.

We have already seen an effective piece of anti-aggressive begging leglislation struck down by the High Court on the grounds that those whom it was directed at needed to fully understand the wording and implications of the Law.

Therefore DCC are not alone wasting their time and resources,but potentially may leave themselves open to the attentions of the same Legal Representatives who so assidiously guarded the rights of,mainly foreign,beggars to hustle at will.

I remain sceptical that the defence of not having a working knowledge of a host countries language will get one very far in other developed countries....perhaps other posters have experiences in this matter ?

In the meantime enda1,consider whether the civil liberties of thiose who have mounds of stinking rotting refuse piled up outside their residences are being threatened and who'se responsible for this threat ?

Chips Lovell

Having someone knock on your door is draconian and a violation of civil liberties?

heinz hummer

if they knock on my door i'll be throwin THEM in me wheelie bin

enda1

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Having someone knock on your door is draconian and a violation of civil liberties?

Well yes. Its a bit Tax Collector-like. I've a similar issue with TV license inspectors.

The cops don't come along and force you to show that all your income is legitimate, that you've receipts for all purchases etc. etc. Why employ an army of rubbish enforcers?

Chips Lovell

enda1 wrote: »

The cops don't come along and force you to show that all your income is legitimate, that you've receipts for all purchases etc. etc. Why employ an army of rubbish enforcers?

Actually, they can. Criminal Assets Bureau.

Not to mention that Revenue can do an audit on you too.

heinz hummer

its just a rubbish idea

hyperborean

If you dispose of your waste in a correct manner why worry about proving it?

scalpeen

I am lucky I can dispose of my refuse legitimally and ethically near to where I live. Why should I have to pay for a service I don't use? Indeed why am I paying all these property taxes?? Its about time we stood up to all this nonsense.

tayto lover

AlekSmart wrote: »

I don't see anything Draconian about it at all.

The Council are in a totally invidious position,being damned if they do and equally vilified if they don't.

It should be noted that this is a Bye-Law and as such fully compliant with the laws of the land.

However,ask yourself if the individuals responsible for the situation will be concened in the slightest about a Hi-Vizzed Inspector knocking on their door ?

My belief is that such a personage will be greeted with shrugged shoulder's,a blank stare and a "No speak English" sign.

We have already seen an effective piece of anti-aggressive begging leglislation struck down by the High Court on the grounds that those whom it was directed at needed to fully understand the wording and implications of the Law.

Therefore DCC are not alone wasting their time and resources,but potentially may leave themselves open to the attentions of the same Legal Representatives who so assidiously guarded the rights of,mainly foreign,beggars to hustle at will.

I remain sceptical that the defence of not having a working knowledge of a host countries language will get one very far in other developed countries....perhaps other posters have experiences in this matter ?

In the meantime enda1,consider whether the civil liberties of thiose who have mounds of stinking rotting refuse piled up outside their residences are being threatened and who'se responsible for this threat ?

So are you assuming that all the people who do not use waste disposal companies dump their rubbish?
I know several who burn their rubbish in their pot-bellied stove and put the waste food in their compost bin. Should they have to explain their actions? I hardly think so.

Chips Lovell

Burning your rubbish is illegal.

mitosis

I'm all for it. You should see the amount of black sacks dumped most nights behind my local bottle bank. The stuff thrown in the river. Everyone should pay a refuse collection fee, whether they put anything out or not, to discourage illegal dumping. Of course there was a time when everyone paid and the council collected, but now in a privatised system most people pay twice and the rest dump at the battle bank.

Get Real

tayto lover wrote: »

So are you assuming that all the people who do not use waste disposal companies dump their rubbish?
I know several who burn their rubbish in their pot-bellied stove and put the waste food in their compost bin. Should they have to explain their actions? I hardly think so.

As said above, that is illegal whether that be to burn rubbish in a conventional fireplace, outside in a barrell, in a purpose built incinerator, or even in a purpose built building with a chimney/flue attached:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/environment/waste_management_and_recycling/burning_household_waste.html

However I'm on the fence on this one. While I agree its a good idea to enforce the responsible management of waste and curb illegal dumping, is it right to call on doors and presuming people are guilty, putting the onus on citizens to prove their innocence?

This is completely contrary to the notion of innocent until proven guilty

. And the difference between this and the CAB is the CAB gathers evidence or at least a decent lead/ has reason to pursue a certain individual. They don't call round out of the blue to people door to door.

Will this be different?

OPTION A) Will it be a case of " we're accusing you of this without any basis, so its up to you to prove to us that we're wrong" ?

Or,

OPTION B it could be a case of (which i agree with) selectively calling into people who have been caught dumping/convicted of dumping/reported by a neighbour etc of dumping.

I have a compost bin out the back, between that and plastic, cardboard,glass,tins,cans etc, there's actually very little inorganic/unrecyclable waste left that needs to be put in a bin.

So depending on which approach they take A or B, I'm not sure what opinion can be formed.

Manach

It seems yet more creeping State shift into an inquisitorial model of governance where the burdens of proof are being shifted to show that the individual is not guilty of the act instead of having the State to prove it. At least the tax funds from Central government are at least being spent proving more employment to the State sector than wasted away on irrelevant like actually providing a service.

AlekSmart

Get Real wrote: »

.

However I'm on the fence on this one. While I agree its a good idea to enforce the responsible management of waste and curb illegal dumping, is it right to call on doors and presuming people are guilty, putting the onus on citizens to prove their innocence?

This is completely contrary to the notion of innocent until proven guilty

And the difference between this and the CAB is the CAB gathers evidence or at least a decent lead/ has reason to pursue a certain individual. They don't call round out of the blue to people door to door.

Will this be different?

So depending on which approach they take A or B, I'm not sure what opinion can be formed.

I'm not certain that all of the respondents to the OP are familiar with the specifics of this story.

Currently,it is a Dublin City Council specific problem,although other LA's are taking an active interest in how it is developing.

Get Real asks if the proposed action will be "different" to a blanket trawl which appears to send many into a frenzy of purple haze.

The situation on the ground has been monitored over a protracted period and it's fair to say that DCC's Environmental Services Dept is in possession of specific information regarding those who have been systematically abusing their neighbours and other users of the City's infrastructure.

However,the Council,in this instance,has to be VERY delicate about how it handles the situation,as if it puts as much as a fáda in the wrong place it will feel the wrath of those who see themselves,in social terms, as protectors of the underdog.

The situation is so very Irish,in that the identities of the main offenders are very likely known to the Council,and other agencies such as The Dept of the Environment and the Gardai.

However,in the current climate,to take action against these people could,and most likely would,be portrayed as an uncaring,malevolent State oppressing the poorest of the poor etc etc.

The issue here is finding an "Irish Solution to an Irish Problem" which will stick....not,by any means,an easy task !

LeinsterDub

With tax the assumption of guilt has always come before innocence. You have always had to prove you're innocent. The revenue could demand back taxes from you and it's up to you to prove you don't owe it.

djpbarry

Manach wrote: »

At least the tax funds from Central government are at least being spent proving more employment to the State sector than wasted away on irrelevant like actually providing a service.

Let's just overlook the funds that are currently being wasted cleaning up after these dirty ****ers dumping their rubbish in the streets.

hatrickpatrick

hyperborean wrote: »

If you dispose of your waste in a correct manner why worry about proving it?

Because it should be up to them to offer some proof that I'm doing something wrong, not the other way around. Same applies to pretty much anything. The burden of proof should never be on the suspect unless and until there's direct evidence for them to have to refute.

Chips Lovell

So no more tax audits? Or television licence inspectors?

goose2005

Would be far better to do the same with farmers, I have a relative who burns everything, even plastic sacks. One of the prerequisite for grants etc. should be that you have a receipt for how you dispose of farm waste.

enda1

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

So no more tax audits? Or television licence inspectors?

Definitely no more television license inspectors. To begin with, it's a nonsense tax and it only focuses on the middle class. If it is to exist, and I don't think it should, it should come as a duty on electricity for example or as some other unavoidable payment method.

Revenue is a bit more complex as it is related to the running of the country at the basic level. Revenue are quite clear that they target suspect cases for audit rather than random, though they do say there are a small number of random cases per year. It's not something I'm wholly comfortable with either to be frank.

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Burning your rubbish is illegal.

I must rush around all my neighbours and tell them that and also that they have to pay a rubbish tax that they can't afford instead.

djpbarry

tayto lover wrote: »

I must rush around all my neighbours and tell them that...

Please do. There are very good reasons why burning your own rubbish is not the done thing in modern society.

tayto lover

djpbarry wrote: »

Please do. There are very good reasons why burning your own rubbish is not the done thing in modern society.

Would it be ok for them to bury it then? The council do that.

djpbarry

tayto lover wrote: »

Would it be ok for them to bury it then?

If they compost it first, yes.

Mr.Micro

djpbarry wrote: »

If they compost it first, yes.

Tayto has a point. The Council does bury rubbish and much of it is not compostable and its plastic, metal, liquids, all sorts of non biodegradable stuff.


The less waste the better but still everything is wrapped in plastic, hard or soft. With regards to the Council calling round to see ones contract re waste that is OK by me, if we can all call round to the Council when it is not doing it job.

Kosseegan

AlekSmart wrote: »

It should be noted that this is a Bye-Law and as such fully compliant with the laws of the land.

A bye Lay is not immune to legal challenge on the grounds of unconstitutionality or exceeding the power to make it under the parent statute. I would foresee an early and successful challenge to this.

oscarBravo

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Tayto has a point. The Council does bury rubbish and much of it is not compostable and its plastic, metal, liquids, all sorts of non biodegradable stuff.

The council has a licence to do so. If Tayto's neighbours want to burn or bury their rubbish, they are more than welcome to apply for the appropriate permit.

djpbarry

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Tayto has a point. The Council does bury rubbish and much of it is not compostable and its plastic, metal, liquids, all sorts of non biodegradable stuff.

Sure, but as said above, they have a permit to do so and besides, this stuff wouldn't be getting buried if residents weren't putting it in "landfill waste" to begin with.