Deposit return scheme (recycling) - Part 2

Why can we not have actual figures for 2024 like x deposits charged and x return vouchers issued.

Given that there were a lot of in-scope products that deposits weren't paid on for a few weeks in the lead up to the full rollout I'd say the first full calendar year, is likely to be worse than the May 24-May 25 figure so that would not be a smart move.

They should also give the returned figure as a % of how many in-scope products were sold. There was a Newstalk breakfast debate yesterday morning, John Gibbons and Larissa Nolan both agreed that the figure of 900m sounds great but without knowing how many weren't recycled it's a bit of a pointless figure.

I'd love to get some details on where and how the recycling is done as well.

Are these container recycling targets or container return targets?

What a carry on. No wonder we have posters coming on here to tell us they're "recycling" more with this scheme when re-turn.ie is so full of 💩. Cheers for highlighting that for us @elperello

It's a given that Re-turn can only forward for recycling what it actually collects.

In the link I posted earlier they state -

What will happen to the drink containers once they have been collected?

All containers collected will be sent for recycling. The Deposit Return Scheme focuses on maximising the volume and quality of material collected for recycling

Of course a certain amount of cans/bottles will be recycled from other sources IE. bin companies.

So the recycling rate could be greater than what is collected by Re-turn.

I have zero confidence in anything said by Re-turn given how they have blatantly misrepresented "collected for recycling" and "recycling" on the website.

"Sent for recycling" doesn't actually mean it will be recycled.

By the way it has been clarified several times on this thread that Re-turn is not a quango.

A quango or QUANGO (less often QuANGO or QANGO) is an organisation to which a government has devolved power, but which is still partly controlled and/or financed by government bodies. The term was originally a shortening of "quasi NGO"

Thats exactly what ReTurn is.

So what is ReTurn?

Can a private company come in and place their own machines next to return ones

No

And get same or better prices from whoever is doing the actual recycling

No

Can return go bankrupt? Can one see their accounts like one can with private limited companies?

Yes

What are the penalties to return if EU targets are not met? Why would the state and taxpayers have to pay this penalty

Because the Member State is responsible.

return are a quango, no amounts of spin changes the fact

No comment.

Return are WORSE than a QUANGO. The government have given Return a monopoly and devolved powers to them (typical of QUANGOs) but without subjecting them to the scrutiny \ putting Government appointees on the board you would expect with a full QUANGO.

So when people say Return aren't a QUANGO, that really is no defence or excuse of them.

Obviously I don't believe Re-turn are a quango.

That's not necessarily intended as a defence or excuse for Re-turn.

You are correct that sent for recycling doesn't mean it's actually recycled.

If it turns out that it's not recycled the entire project will be in deep trouble.

You haven't answered. What are they then?

You well understand the point the poster was trying to make.

You can't come up with an alternative term to describe them, just repeating they are not a quango.
How does it materially change the point the poster was trying to get across?

They have in effect been funded by the Government by establishment of a monopoly for them that comes with a revenue stream.

They operate by Government fiat. They can't just make unliteral changes to the operation of the scheme without referring back to the Government, can they?
So in judging their performance and results, also being judged is the parameters of the scheme as established by the Government.

What's worse than some quangos is that the Government have even less control or oversight of them, despite devolving powers to them and establishing a line of funding for them. No government appointees on the board.

If they don't meet their targets they will just go begging to the government to increase deposits.
So they sure quack like a quango.

So for the purposes of this discussion, it is reasonable to refer to them as a quango, or as I have done, worse than a quango.

I see you have quoted my post.

Please clarify if this means I am no longer on your ignore list.