Yes I know all of this. I’m saying it’s absolute bullshít
You’d still have to drink the thing before boarding and return it for €0.15 cash then. Waste of time
I have contributed to their bonuses which are likely made up of ‘non returns’. Bunch of cunce
"WH Smith & Boots have agreed to operate manual return points in major Irish airports." Ok, let's put the word out here, has anyone on this thread completed or knows someone who has "completed a manual return"?
Furthermore, I have yet to see a WH Smith or Boots in the departure lounge in Shannon Airport which I used a few months ago
Airports are a CASH COW for ReTurn! Good for them (unredeemed) deposits and recyclable bottles and cans not recycled!
EXPORT, AIRPORT AND MARITIME STOCK GUIDANCE FOR PRODUCERS AND WHOLESALERS / DISTRIBUTORS
4. Products Sold to In Port Non-Duty Free Customers
If the producer/wholesaler is producing/selling goods to non-duty free business customers in the airport/seaport (airside or landside) and these products can be consumed in the airport/seaport or brought on a plane/ship, a deposit must be charged as this is considered a standard domestic sale. These products must be registered with Re-turn and include a Re-turn logo and Re-turn barcode(ROI specific or international). To facilitate returns of these in-scope products and refunding of the deposit to consumers, WH Smith & Boots have agreed to operate manual return points in major Irish airports.
If the public can be informed of salaries at RTE, surely our esteemed Minister for ReTurn can demand the same?
https://www.rte.ie/news/2024/0802/1463243-rte-annual-report/
I'm going to get 2 receipts for the same amount to compare the barcodes.
I wonder has anyone tried photo copying the receipt yet.
You and thousands of others are helping pay the wages of the ReTurn quango!
Rare I’d call something a disgrace - but the fact this scheme is in play at airports is vile
At your gate in Dublin Airport if you get Coke Zero for example in the shop, the deposit is applied. How the F in any way is that fair? Not gonna bring bottle with me and back….
Is there a machine in Dublin Airport? If I cashed the voucher here I’d have to spend it here?
Stupid stuff
If you look at the website, most of them have a loyalty card reader, meaning as an alternative to a paper voucher you could scan your Tesco or Supervalu loyalty card and get your deposit in points rather than money. If, I know I'm like a broken record, if the scheme had been fully thought out.
Some top quality green tech there. No reason we cant have machines like that. Obviously not at every shop currently with an RVM but at recycling centres and shopping centres for example. It would fit Ossian and Foley better to push for improvements this year instead of spoofing and telling us not to return containers at the weekend.
A few weeks ago I found some of the tendering documentation for the DRS. Many of the things you have suggested, deposit paid to bank account or to an app, is easily done. The truth of the matter is, they went with the cheapest option. A cheap basic machine. Guess what, the machines break down a lot, no bulk return option etc.
The manufacturer is Envipco. Take a look at their Quantum model, and compare it to the machine you use regularly: https://www.envipco.com/reverse-vending-machines/quantum
We could have learned from previous DRS launches how not to feck it up. Just because certain DRS elsewhere took years to improve you seem to think that justifies a shyite launch and a shyite DRS here. Not only that you reckon we should be happy with a completely open ended timeline for any kind of improvement. All the while Re-Turn are stuffing their Scrooge McDuck money pit with our deposits to the tune of 10s of millions per year. I think its obvious to most by now this was and is by design. The only question is how long is it going to continue unabated.
You have to be on the Re-Turn payroll somehow or you were involved in designing it. Its absolutely ridiculous the kind of tenuous stuff you're dumping in here to justify your position.
You were asked very specific questions about the scheme, questions which would highlight the inconsistencies in the defences of the scheme and your own posts.
Instead you dodge by reposting self serving waffle from the Minister.
Utterly disingenuous.
This was the question that was put to you, and you ran away from once.~ And don't pretend that drivel from a waffling politician is an answer.
Even though we have examples of the scheme in operation in other EU countries, examples we could have copied and learnt from... we did not copy any tried and tested schemes and instead are having to repeat mistakes other schemes went through?
And where are your posts challenging the claims that we copied what worked elsewhere? Don't pretend you haven't seen them on the thread, you have been posting on the thread from the outset.
And what does any of that self serving waffle from the incompetent minister have to do with machines breaking down and the screw ups with whether logo required or not?
Or items not in the scheme being charged deposits which could not be refunded?
It wasn't a working scheme when it launched, and there are still basic flaws with it.
Anyone competent who genuinely cared about the success of the scheme would have foreseen such issues as well as:
Lack of bulk machines at council depots.
The need for clear rules for retailers where RVMs are down for handling manual returns.
Ignorance is no defence. Any competent minister would have looked at the examples in existing schemes in EU countries and anticipated them.
But we don't have a competent minister, we have a waffler.
What changes happened in May?
There is supposedly 40 countries operating a DRS scheme. And the Minister is acting like this is the first scheme in the world, warts and all and we will make changes!
I remember posting about the Dail Committee meeting on 30 April, where the Minister said One Thing At A Time. It is better to have the scheme up and running with room for development, rather than still being on the drawing board looking for perfection. My contributions about the similarity of other schemes, was about the basic financial models. A company made up from the polluters which funds the schemes, with no cost to the taxpayer.
Deputy Paul Murphy: If the Minister of State wants to see more reuse, why do we not have, even at a minimum level, a two-tier deposit return system whereby we have reusable bottles accepted that are reused that are not shredded and turned into different bottles? If that is what the Minister of State says he wants to do, why has he not done it?
Deputy Ossian Smyth: One thing at a time. There were many options for what I could put into the first version of the deposit return scheme. I could have done glass. I could have opted for Tetra Pak products, etc. I had a million different options, but I wanted a working scheme to launch on the day when it was meant to. I look at other countries that took more than a decade and then did not manage to launch schemes at all.
Everything is available for version 2. For example, we could do charity donations where people can opt to give their money to charity rather than take it back. We can do different products. We could do reusable products. Those are all options for version 2. I will be pushing my officials to work on what they will launch in the next version. There will be changes happening this year, even in May.
Ehmmm
There are numerous posts to that effect on the thread from pro Return posters.
It occurs repeatedly as a defence of the scheme. We copied scheme that works elsewhere, in other EU countries, why wouldnt it work here.
The search is crap so I cant determine if you made such a claim. But there is no doubt the claim occurred repeatedly on the thread. And I am also sure other posters will agree with that.
I am certain you have no posts challenging the claim on the thread.
But perhaps you can clarify - even though we have examples of the scheme in operation in other EU countries, examples we could have copied and learnt from... we did not copy any tried and tested schemes and instead are having to repeat mistakes other schemes went through?
Who told you that?
Nope.
We were constantly told we were copying a scheme from elsewhere, that was tried and tested and worked. Was that a lie? And havent you made similar arguments on the thread?
A scheme should be fully functional from the start. It can expand in scope or improve with tweaks.
But you dont need years to get the core right with clear rules for all concerned. We did not do that.
I would expect any scheme to develop gradually over the years. Rather than think it should arrive fully formed from the start. An example is Queensland which started in November 2018. Early on there was a lot of negative reporting due to things not working well. After that it mostly disappeared from the media, a natural thing to happen.
Five years later they got round to expanding the scheme to take glass. But someone wanting to denigrate the Irish scheme could easily point to Qld as being superior to Ireland, because they take glass. But of course not all the locals in Qld are happy with the new addition to the scheme.
https://theshout.com.au/expanded-queensland-cds-angers-winemakers/
Read the Victoria FAQs:
https://www.returnit.com.au/vic/faq/
They have bulk return centres and bank account refund of deposits.
You're working very hard to run down DRS outside of Ireland instead of acknowledging that Re-Turn was designed by gombeens here to hoard deposits.
I'll ask you again for maybe the 6th time on this thread:
Any comment on how we can use whats been implemented elsewhere to improve Re-Turn? You know to perhaps show some respect to customers and shop staff who are paying for this scheme and doing all the extra work for free?
I live rural and pick up the odd bit of litter along the road here. There would always be some cans & bottles, both before and after this current scheme. But in terms of quantity, it'd be tiny overall both before & after.
And where did this 23% figure come from? There was no reliable pre deposit estimate afaik (it was oft discussed early in the year) as the bin companies didn't collate it, they just sorted out sent to the appropriate customers. There is/ was money in aluminium cans etc.
I'd have no problem with the scheme on balance if was cost neutral for the householder allowing for fees paid already to bin companies. More work for the householder but if there had been a reduction in bin charges, might be some sense in it.
Meh
It’s a rancid scheme either way
Seldom see them littered.
Some people re-use them.
I've seen them filling water from taps in public areas where they find the water more palatable than their own supply.
I’m not sure if it has been mentioned but my son was able to get a deposit for bottles he bought in Birmingham uk. So we paid no deposit when purchased but got a deposit when we returned them. You could clean up if you were near the border and frequently buying in the north.
Very hard to throw a 5L onto the side of the street without being noticed
That is opportunism on behalf of the manufacturers / wholesalers / retailers, but it in no way makes the deposit a tax which is the initial point I made re people calling a refundable deposit a tax.
As you have to put up with bad water the five litre might be better value and there is no deposit.
