why do people oppose paying the relatively small recycling fees?

Xterminator

Why is there a campain to oppose the introduction of paying for reclycling in Dublin?
It is going to cost more (short term) to recycle waste than to dump it in a big pit, but big pits get full eventually. What if they build the next one beside your house?

Ireland has a terrible record on recycling waste, and now the knockers are out opposing a small charge (<£100) per annum, to try to preserve our beautiful country for future generations. I think it is small minded ,and narrow visioned.

And its not just the money. i heard on the radio people saying the didnt want to have to sort their rubbish into different types cause it's not nice, or they couldn't be bothered.

Do you think it is reasonable to pay the 1.50 a week or whatever it works out as to have a better enviornment?
Or do you think you shouldnt have to pay?
Or do you care?

Paladin

[words of wisdom] Recycling is good. [/words of wisdom]

Ri-ra

It's beyond me, as well. The Irish countryside is absolutely filthy as well: abandoned cars, fridges, cookers, washing machines, etc., that some git couldn't be a r s e d bringing to the dump. Crisp bags and plastic bags snagged on barbed wire fences. The McDonald's rubbish in the fountain on O'Connell St. We'll miss it when it's gone. And it _will_ go if we keep it up...

Coyote

Well i'm happey to pay for reclvcling of my junk, but there is a lot of people who adding a 100 pounds a year it a lot of money to them. plus people do not trust the councls to spend the money in the best ways.

Coyote

---

You try to be smarter,
And I will try to be nicer

hendrix_ex_eye_eye

The people that litter the streets like they don't give a toss and abandon fridges and cars in the countryside are NOT the people that will use the recycling bins, in fact they probably won't even pay the tax.

(Why pay for it when you can take your recyclables to your local corporation and recycle for free. Why pay MORE taxes to do this?)

Magwitch

I think many people would object because recycling is something that shoudl already be part of county council amd state waste managment, paid for already by our taxes.

The desire to impose new fees for something that should already exist as standard practice is either a half-assed half-hearted effort to look like the authorities are doing something about the environment OR an attempt to give recycling an expensive and hence unpopular image so the authorities do not have to stick to it long term and make a go of it.

DadaKopf

Maybe it's because the recycling service offered doesn't recycle paper or glass. The expression 'too little too late' comes to mind.

Victor

Yes when faced with the £65 recycling bill and a £2,300 credit card bill (cripes!!!!) - guess which got more attention when I got paid £981?. At the time even for me it was very difficult to come up with the £65.

People have to realise they have to pay for wasting. People need to cut down on waste. How about making all shops and especially, petrol stations provide some form of recycling. They won't be long getting on to manufacturers to cut down waste.

How about extending the system of bringing yesterday's newspaper back when you buy today's? That should rationalise all those weekend supplements.

Essentially its about making mileage by making it a political as opposed to enviromental issue. This stems from the 1970's when income tax was increased to abolish domestic rates (a form of local property tax). Some people felt that they were paying for all their local services through their income tax from that point on.

---

Changing call sign to SIERRA PAPA OSCAR OSCAR FOXTROT.

_CreeD_

It's the same as the water-charges debacle I suppose. People reckon it should all be part of the standard services paid for by your tax. Which it should really, but since it is necessary I wouldn't mind paying it regardless - so long as an efficient service is offered, not the usual half arsed council attempts.
Hell we pay TV licenses for recycled crap anyway and no-ones out campaigning against that (Compare the amount of time the average person watches Irish TV to other channels)....

DadaKopf

Then there's the issue of it being 'double taxation'. Those people protesting down in Cork were perfectly justified in my opinion.

Puck

The laziness of some people when it comes to tidying up their own crap never ceases to amaze me!

---

John (yes THE John!)
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government."

ConUladh

Given that the tax rate has gone down the last couple of years surely an increase would not have been necessary only no decrease

And it would have kept the EU happy as well (in relation to our budget)

I don't like saying this cause naturally I'm a money grabbing b&stard who's quite content with the extra little bit of cash

hmmm

The cost concerns, for those of us who have no problem recycling per se, is that it is a 'backdoor' tax. We pay our taxes, the govenment is accountable. What's to stop the local authorities jacking up the price we pay for this service? "We need to build a new bridge, let's add an extra £10 to the recycling fee and say its because of extra costs"

Xterminator

Originally posted by ConUladh:
Given that the tax rate has gone down the last couple of years surely an increase would not have been necessary only no decrease

I think you'll find it's the local authorities who are charging this figure, depending on how much they have in their budget and how much shortfall they need to make up , to meet the minumim standard of recycling targets.

They cant up or down taxes at a government level, the can only make local levies.

So if tunder the current arrangement that locally elected officals are in chage of arrangeing the local services, they must pay the bils with a local levy. This has nothing to do with the central government. Also those who say they are paying their taxes already,
1. Taxes have been cut dramatically in the last few budgets
2. This is a new service. Not just dump it in a hole solution.
And remember there are those whop just could not be arssed recycling, no matter what the cost.

ConUladh

In relation to my earlier post, I got it into my head that someone said it should be covered by our taxes (PAYE) and someone else sais that people would object to an increase in the tax rate

Scrolling through the conversation now I don't see that anywhere, I think I need to go lie down

Ri-ra

Anyone know what the recycling provisions would take into account?

Would they include larger items like fridges, cookers, etc?

Lump

I agree with Coyote, We may not mind paying a hundred quid to have rubbish recycled but think of the people that can hardly afford a roof over their heads??


John

mewso

I agree with what was said above about County Councils. You pay your taxes and the Government spends the money. Look at the budget and see where your taxes are being spent.
Recycling, water charges etc. are charged for services provided by Local Authorities. The water charges is a perfect example. Having worked in a Water Charges dept. in the council I know all the arguements for and against.
To call it a Double-Taxation is crap. The service is not covered in full by taxes and any charge you pay only goes a little way to funding the service.
To worry about those poor people who can't afford it well wake up we 'aint living in Victorian times. Ever heard of the waiver system. You give details of your income and based on that you get a partial/full waiving of the charge. I processed them myself for South Dublin.
The E.E.C will most likely insist on the likes of Water/Recycling/Service Charges in the future so we have to come up with a fair and sensible way of levying it.

Victor

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Lump:
I agree with Coyote, We may not mind paying a hundred quid to have rubbish recycled but think of the people that can hardly afford a roof over their heads??</font>

As musician says, most people on low incomes - the (under)employed, large families, pensioners - are able to get full or partial waivers. The homeless don't need to pay.

---

Changing call sign to SIERRA PAPA OSCAR OSCAR FOXTROT.

Talliesin

It's not a tax on recycling. It's a tax on all waste disposal.

Sanitation is a basic human right, it should be paid for according to ability (i.e. through income and corporation taxes) not as a flat fee.

bonkey

People oppose it because its money they dont have to pay. Joe Bloggs will quie happily tell you that he doesnt want that dump built there thank you very much, but will also refuse to pay for recycling when he can dump his stuff. And good ol' Joe doesnt see the dichotomy in his stances.

Having recently move here to Switzerland, I can say that I heartily approve of their approach here.

You pay *by the bag* to dispose of rubbish. And we're talking about a quid for a small paper-basket sized bag. If its no in the approved bag, they will not take it. You want the bags, you buy them, and it costs.

This encourages people to recycle. Major shops have recycling points for PET-based packaging and batteries - I believe they are obliged to. Bottle banks are rife.

So...people pay less by recycling, and the ease of access to dumping points for recycling makes it so easy.

End result...something like 88% of all aluminium cans sold in the country are reclaimed for recycling. Bottles are similarly high on the count. Paper, I'm not sure about, because you can burn that for lighting fires, but its still well-catered for. Its so well catered for that you can put a notice on your postbox saying that you do not want junk mail. Anyone delivering you junk mail (i.e. hand delivered) will be subject to large fines should you complain.

I agree with whoever who said that your taxes etc. should cover recycling. I agree completely. I also think that to encourage it, you put in place proper recycling facilities, and then make dumping expensive. Watch attitudes change....run 3 bins, or pay extra for the privelege of dumping. Take your pick

jc

C B

Using waste services is the same as using any other services and people should pay in just the same way.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by C B:
Using waste services is the same as using any other services and people should pay in just the same way.</font>

Absolutely.

The problem is that recycling requires more human effort in the first place - sorting your rubbish and all that. To convert people to recycling, it has to be a cheaper alternative, because I dont think enough Irish people give a damn about the environment to undertake such effort willingly.

Charge for the waste disposal service, and make recycling the cheaper alternative.

Of course, then all the Joe Bloggs' will be up in arms about the raising of prices for waste disposal. Fsckers.

jc

Talliesin

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Using waste services is the same as using any other services and people should pay in just the same way.</font>

Not true, as we all use the service any time anyone avails of it rather than just dumping their rubbish in the nearest park. Public sewage and waste removal is one of the big changes that improved public health around the Victorian period and it affects us all.

I go out of my way to recycle my waste (since I don't actually have the recycling facilities I am now being charged for) going to considerable effort to bring recyclable waste to recycling facilities that are not near me. It isn't laziness or miserliness on my part that leads me to oppose the tax (which once we actually have recycling will probably be in my favour on balance), but concern with social justice.

Xterminator

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Talliesin:
It's not a tax on recycling. It's a tax on all waste disposal.

Sanitation is a basic human right, it should be paid for according to ability (i.e. through income and corporation taxes) not as a flat fee.</font>

Just a quick response, to say why?
Does it not cost as much to collect the waste for a poor man, as it does for a rich man?

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Talliesin:
Sanitation is a basic human right, it should be paid for according to ability (i.e. through income and corporation taxes) not as a flat fee.</font>

I dont know that it is recognised as a basic human right, but even if it isnt, it should be.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xterminator:
Just a quick response, to say why?
Does it not cost as much to collect the waste for a poor man, as it does for a rich man?</font>

Basic human right means you are entitled to it, regardless of your ability to pay. AS a modern society, we are suppsoed to accept responsibility not just for ourselves but for all mankind. The attitude of "If someone cannot afford to pay, they should be denied a service" is pure capitalism. What Talliesin is saying is that as a human right, we should look at it as : "everyone is entitled to this, how do we fund that".

Also - rich people, through their extra disposable income, generate MORE waste.

Therefore, it does not cost the same to collect and process their waste. Flat fees therefore benefit the rich and punish the poor.....somewthing there is far too much of in this world.

jc

Xterminator

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bonkey:


Also - rich people, through their extra disposable income, generate MORE waste.

jc
</font>

You offer no [proof for that statement, but i offer proof to refute it. The travelling community must be one of the poorist in our state, but have you ever seen the amount of rubbish they produce?
They have a couple of caravans in a field for days, and can change the entire landscape.

So there you have it!

Gladiator

i will never pay for it, recycling is a buzz word they use for charging you to colect your rubbish which you have a right to be colected,
all this crap will have little efect of the state of the country, bussness waste is the problem,

i dont mind paying through taxation for recycling, but this is not about recycling its about taken away basic rights, i recieved the bill for it and i have no intention of paying

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xterminator:
You offer no proof for that statement, but i offer proof to refute it. The travelling community must be one of the poorist in our state, but have you ever seen the amount of rubbish they produce?
They have a couple of caravans in a field for days, and can change the entire landscape.

So there you have it!
</font>

Well done. You have proven that they take less care in what they do with their rubbish, not that they generate more.

Its simple consumerism - the more you spend, the more (generally speaking) you get. The more you get, the more packaging it contains. The more packaging, the more waste.

I am not demeaning poorer people in any way...I think they are often far more pragmatic and efficient in their use of consumables....which also leads to less waste.

They may not keep the waste as tidy...but this is not to say that they generate less or more.

jc

IKiigan

This is an easy one. Why do people object to the recycling fees? It certainly isn't because they object to recycling. Dublin is filthy, and anyone who lives here knows it.

The main reason is because we already pay extremely high income tax rates. A lot of public money already goes into Dublin Corporation and waste management. Why should we get stung with this additional cost? The waste management problems in Dublin are not down to lack of funding, it's down to mismanagement and poor decisions over the last 10 years.

Another reason is : people in rented accomodation are not catered for by the scheme i.e. you pay your 65 quid or whatever and then you move to a new place 1 month later.

People in Dublin are sick of every MF out there trying to get their fingers in your pocket. It's bad enough with the TV license (what a joke - a license for a bloody TV) etc. Dammit, the working people in Dublin put enough cash into the economy in the form of taxes already. We've already paid for a decent waste management system. For the corpo to come back with cap in hand is a cheek IMO.

Anyway, it won't succeed.

Ian

Xterminator

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by IKiigan:
This is an easy one. Why do people object to the recycling fees? It certainly isn't because they object to recycling. Dublin is filthy, and anyone who lives here knows it.

The main reason is because we already pay extremely high income tax rates. A lot of public money already goes into Dublin Corporation and waste management. Why should we get stung with this additional cost? The waste management problems in Dublin are not down to lack of funding, it's down to mismanagement and poor decisions over the last 10 years.

Another reason is : people in rented accomodation are not catered for by the scheme i.e. you pay your 65 quid or whatever and then you move to a new place 1 month later.

People in Dublin are sick of every MF out there trying to get their fingers in your pocket. It's bad enough with the TV license (what a joke - a license for a bloody TV) etc. Dammit, the working people in Dublin put enough cash into the economy in the form of taxes already. We've already paid for a decent waste management system. For the corpo to come back with cap in hand is a cheek IMO.

Anyway, it won't succeed.

Ian</font>

I quoted your whole post, cause I disagree with just about every word innit.

Dublin has a litter problem, and parts of it are filthy, but you can't tar the whole city with 1 tag. There are areas of beauty I Dublin that will match or exceed any other area in the world!

Tax has gone down hugely in the last few years. (and about time). Your bin collection has not been reduced. I.E. refuse collection and taxes are a separate issue.

Now thanks to our EU friends Ireland, and specifically Dublin Corp. Finally have to take action to ensure that we recycle more waste. It costs money to do this. New money.

Waivers are available for this fee for those in certain circumstances, eg unemployed.

Local authorities provide waste management service to local areas, and is funded through local levies like this 1. It is not centralised, thus cannot be accurately paid for by centralised tax.

It is a new service and a welcome service by most right thinking people. We cant keep putting rubbish is a hole. We need to think about the future of our island, and if we recycle our waste the future is better for everybody. The benefits it will bring will be vast. The cost is small.

If you think waste does vanishes when you throw i out, i can understand your post.

Think about what happens after it's thrown out and you'll understand mine.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Xterminator:
Now thanks to our EU friends Ireland, and specifically Dublin Corp. Finally have to take action to ensure that we recycle more waste. It costs money to do this. New money. </font>

But this is exactly the problem. Its takes money - yes. But why does it take NEW money?

No-one can seriously believe that DubCorp (or any other corpo/council in Ireland) never realised that someday the need to recycle would be imposed on them. The argument that it takes "new" money is ludicrous....unles they suffer from complete mismanagement. For the past 10 years, there could have been a small surcharge put on bin collections, to build up a reserve to implement recycling, or to switch over to it. No-one would have complained much....expecially if the surcharge was not explicitly listed as "extra money to pay for the implementation of recycling", but rather just as an increase to meet rising costs.

This is a problem which I see as being typical in Irish government (at its various levels). People are not looking forward...it always seems to be "cross that bridge when we come to it, and even then only when we discover we cant stay on this bank, and dont know how to swim".

Example - Dublin traffic is gone to crap. The proposed LUAS solution will remove X amount of traffic from the roads - roughly the same amount as traffic is expected to increase by during the implementation of the LUAS. Yeah - great planning.

Refuse collection is the same. Our government - again at its various levels - has waited as long as possible WITHOUT introducing recycling because it was always going to be hassle. Now that they are being told to implement it, all of a sudden its like "oh, we cant afford this - Joe Bloggs will have to pay for it". Hello??? Like this requirement was a surprise to anyone???

Our various levels of government have been all but criminally neglectful in terms of catering for recycling, or planning for its introduction. Now that its finally coming about, they want us to pay for it because they never planned for this day.

jc

ConUladh

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bonkey:
there could have been a small surcharge put on bin collections, to build up a reserve to implement recycling, or to switch over to it. No-one would have complained much....expecially if the surcharge was not explicitly listed as "extra money to pay for the implementation of recycling", but rather just as an increase to meet rising costs.
</font>

Ah, correct me if I'm wrong but there is no charge in Dublin on refuse collection at the moment, but they are introducing it (I know the rest of the country has it already) which is why there's 'Fight the Bin Tax' posters all over town and some protest last week at the mayor's inaugeration.

So I think an increase on a non-existant charge would have been noticed.

Not saying there shouldn't have been, just pointing out a flaw in your argument

Xterminator

For the past 10 years, there could have been a small surcharge put on bin collections, to build up a reserve to implement recycling, or to switch over to it. No-one would have complained much....expecially if the surcharge was not explicitly listed as "extra money to pay for the implementation of recycling", but rather just as an increase to meet rising costs.


[/QUOTE]

So you prefer a "stealth tax" as oposed to an honest approach?
And you believe that the people who oppose it now, wouldnt have opposed it if it had been implemented gradually.

Hmmm, i am not convinced.
I belive it is a matter of priorities.
Some people really think you throw out your rubbish, some bloke collects it, and thats the end of it.
Other people just couldn't care less.

I am aware that we are running out of holes in which to stuff the tonnes of rubbish, and applaud moves to find a more long term solution.
Finally I think that given the choice of a large rat infersted, scavenger attracting landfill dump in your nearest green space, or a modest fee to recylcle, everyone would chose the latter.
And if we keep dumping, it will come to that!

morgana

I agree that it seems unfair having to pay an extra fee for recycling but on the other hand soon there will be no other option. Landfill space is running out everywhere. The only option is to reduce the waste going to landfill.
Yes recycling demands more of everyone. You'll have to separate waste. You don't like it. So what? People in germany originally probably didn't like it either. They weren't given the choice. Now everybody recycles.
Culture needs changing, starting whith introducing that recycling fee for every bag you get in a supermarket. Bring your own bags . Currently you have to force the girls/boys at the checkout (or the one packing your bag) to use your own bag (and be damn quick about it.)

Greenbean

"Sanitation is a basic human right". Sorry I don't think so; its a basic human responsibility. Yeah I know I'm twisting things. The point is, people in 100 years are going to laugh at our belief that we could ignore sanitation and the environment as much as we do. The way things have shaped up means the future generations have a **** load of cleaning up to do. It should eventually seep into the mental conciousness of western civilisation the real and impending responsibility people have to adopt to make the world a place where people can actually live.

This is so like a stock market crash - while you're flying along in good times, you never need to worry about it, but when it goes wrong it was so obviously foolish to everyone afterwards.

"Example - Dublin traffic is gone to crap. The proposed LUAS solution will remove X amount of traffic from the roads - roughly the same amount as traffic is expected to increase by during the implementation of the LUAS. Yeah - great planning."

Sorry, this is so fcking snidey and wrong. The economy boomed, dublin is bursting at the seams and it happened extremely quickly. Ten years ago Ireland was almost bankrupt, now its lightyears ahead of that - the stress on the infrastructure is a nightmare scenario. What would you rather they do, nothing? Even if this is a running to keep up situation its better than doing nothing.

I've watched how things have progressed of the last years in Dublin, and they've really done a HUGE amount of work. There's only so much you can expect when you start off with the infrastructure that was there, theres only so fast things can reasonably go. The Dublin infrastructure problem was beyond the reams of any normal city and I think its very impressive the work that has been done. Sure its been getting worse - but it could have been a whole lot worse; theres only so much you can expect in 5 years.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Greenbean:
This is so like a stock market crash - while you're flying along in good times, you never need to worry about it, but when it goes wrong it was so obviously foolish to everyone afterwards.</font>

Excuse me? Quite a number of financial experts have been extremely critical of the way in which our country is handling its boom-money, because the government have been in a rush to let everyone see the benefit of the good times (hence increasing popular support) rather than trying to deal with some major long-term issues. Only relatively recently have the government even started thinking about using some of this cash to finance long-term plans which will help us far more after the boom has ended.

If the current economic slowdown does turn into full-blown recession, our national economy will go to the dogs again. Again, people will stand up and say "you should have prepared for this", as they have been saying all along.

The problem is not that *everyone* says "you should have seen it coming", but rather that those in charge choose not to liten to those telling them what *is* coming when it is expedient not to.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">"Example - Dublin traffic is gone to crap. The proposed LUAS solution will remove X amount of traffic from the roads - roughly the same amount as traffic is expected to increase by during the implementation of the LUAS. Yeah - great planning."

Sorry, this is so fcking snidey and wrong. The economy boomed, dublin is bursting at the seams and it happened extremely quickly. Ten years ago Ireland was almost bankrupt, now its lightyears ahead of that - the
</font>

Bzzzzt. Wrong answer.

The motorways and DCs around Dublin were started when I was quite young - perhaps 20+ years ago. At the time, there was criticism on many of the designs that many were only 2-lane and would not meet growing demand over the next 10 to 20 years.

The IMP service was begun in the early 90s. They were the result of a stufy done by one guy who was hired to solve Dublin's traffic problem - he had done so correctly in several other major cities. His ideas were presented in such a way that he stated that if all his recommendations were not implemented together, they would not stem the growing traffic problem and that we would end up where we are today. His ideas were not implemented fully, because DubCorp decided that they did not need to spend so much in so short a time, and that traffic wasnt really that big a problem.

The simple fact is that Dublin has had a growing traffic problem since the late 70s, which showed signs of stress since the late 80s, and reached meltdown in the late 90s. This is not sudden, and has been predicted for quite some time. The only major difference is that ELECTED officials have chosen to query and deny the problems, as the chaos that implementing solutions would generate could jepordise their re-election. Alternately - they are stupid.

This is not a new phenomonen. Traffic experts have been telling us for 20 years we are facing a traffic meltdown, and that we needed to start catering for it before it got out of hand, or we would never recover. The government (local and national) have consistently rejected this notion.

So, I am not saying "I told you so". I am saying that this was an avoidable issue. The fact that only so much can be done in 5 years is exactly my point. Dublin traffic was bad for a lot longer than 5 years, and has been predictably getting there for about 20 years. The government chose not to deal with the issue until 5 years ago. Yes, some of it was financial...but not all.

Now - back to the point - refuse collction.

I used traffic as an analogy - a growing problem we could see coming. You took major exception to this. Are you also trying to argue that we never could have seen the need to recycle coming? Hello???? Dublins population has been too large for its dumps for the past 25 years at least. On a national scale, predictions of dumping space issues arising were predicted for the mid to late 90s....since at least the mid 80s.

Recycling has been a big deal in Europe for over a decade, but the Irish chose to ignore any recommendations from Brussels about encouraging and requiring it.

Now - they have run out of choices, and are asking Joe Bloggs to pay up because of the inability of our city/country to plan ahead and have a structured plan for the implementation of this.

So, no, I am not using perfect hindsight. I am recalling the fact that these issues have been known and identified for almost as long as I have been alive. They have been raised periodically - particularly when new roads were being built, or new dump-sites or incinerators proposed.

We may have been "broke" during the 70s and 80s, but given that most major developments in that timeframe were hugely sponsored by Brussels, I cant accept it as a valid issue.

Yes, the government had to prioritise - there was only so much money available. IMHO, the various governments have all worked on high-profile projects which could be seen to make things better in the short term - re-election material.

There is no glory in spending a huge chunk of cash on roads before theyre desperately needed - the public wont appreciate it. There's no point forcing recycling on people until you have to - the public wont appreciate it. And if the public dont appreciate it, then gee - that might get in the way of the person/party getting re-elected. Cant have that. So find an expert who fill disagree with the predictions, so you have plenty of time. And hey - who knows - maybe this expert will be right. And if not, then we can blame the expert, and say that our analysis never predicted this.

The recycling issue was forseeable - even far more so than the traffic issue. The cost of implementing recycling on a national scale is not that significant - it would require some planning, some legislation, and a little bit of time, but not a huge amount of money (reltively speaking). The fact that it is emerging at so late a stage, with so little thought behind it, and an added cost to the public to give them an incentive NOT to implement it....this is unforgiveable. It shows a lack of forsight, a lack of caring, and a lack of competence in our government.

On a side note, one reason it will be so relatively expensive to implement now is because we will not get EU funding for it - which we would have done if it was implemented 5 or 10 years ago.

jc

Tazz T

The government and the corporation have never had so much money, so why should they introduce this new 'low' tax when they can easily afford to pay it.

The fact is, the charge isn't a million miles away from council tax in the UK. When I lived in London, that charge started relatively cheaply, but shot up each year many times the rate of inflation. In just two years my council tax went from £300 per annum to over £500. Basically, this charge was to get you rubbish taken away but over the years was used for other things traditionally paid for through income tax. The government here are bringing it now when times are easy and there'll be less fuss. You can bet it goes up astronomically in the years to come.

Greenbean

"I used traffic as an analogy - a growing problem we could see coming. You took major exception to this."
I took exception to the idea that Luas is a bad idea. I'm not arguing about pre-planning or anything, I didn't mention it - what I am saying is they have actually got their act together this last 5 years (because they had to) and there is only so much that can be expected.

"Are you also trying to argue that we never could have seen the need to recycle coming? Hello????"
When did I ever suggest that? My points of recycling (and the environment) were that people are ignoring something that is a very big issue and one of their responsibilities, but they won't care about it, because for now recycling doesn't affect people in any major direct way. This will be highly regretted later. Its so very clear - but people don't want to know about it.

If this recycling fee (which I've had to pay) did actually do everything its supposed to without corruption then I would argue feverently for everyone to pay, to cop on and take up your responsibilities. But as suggested by people this may not be where the money really goes then its good for people to be wary and demand accountability.

The thing is this isn't a recycling fee its a waste disposal fee. This isn't a human right, this is a human problem and something we must be responsible for. The rest of the country have been paying for waste disposal this at least 6/7 years? In Donegal we even had a per bag token system (50p per bag or so). This was fair - if you create waste then you pay for it, people can be alot lot less wastefull. What happened the last time a fee on disposal was suggested in dublin? people threw their disposal out on the street - they'd rather live in their own waste than pay. Disgrace. With the government under the hounding and investigation that it has at the moment it would be a very dodgy move by any government office, council to try make a few quick bucks out of it. People are watching stuff closely.

Shinji

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Basically, this charge was to get you rubbish taken away but over the years was used for other things traditionally paid for through income tax.</font>

Indeed. Council tax here is frankly a fucking disgrace - I'm in a two bedroom house, and we pay about 150 quid a month to have our rubbish taken away. This now also goes into paying for policing and schools... Great, I'm paying for the local schools here as well as paying for the education system in my income tax. As a single male with no intention of having kids any time soon, you can guess how overjoyed I am at this fact.

[This message has been edited by Shinji (edited 11-07-2001).]