NSW Government lies about Container Deposit Scheme benefits and the costs

The Return and Earn Scheme

The NSW Government told the suckers people of NSW that cans and bottles make up 43% of all litter and their new Container Deposit Scheme will reduce this by 25%. Impressive numbers as this would be a nearly 11% reduction in litter. They would call this scheme “Return and Earn” when it’s really “Return and get your deposit back”, clearly they don’t understand the definition of the word earn and as will be seen below words like integrity.

The NSW Government is serious about reducing litter.
The Premier has committed to reduce the volume of litter in New
South Wales by 40% by 2020.

The Premier of NSW | September 2015

But of course the NSW Government misled the people of NSW and the only way to find out is if you read the Litter prevention strategy for NSW 2017-2020. The only report you will find is a draft report, the final report was due in the first half of 2018 but we’re almost into the second half of 2019 and it still hasn’t been released. Make of that what you will.

Looking at the volume estimate Container Deposit Scheme beverage containers make up 43% of litter.

If we view this as the number of items and Container Deposit Scheme beverage containers make up 9% of litter.

The earlier estimate from the NSW Government was that a drop of 25% would be achieved which would reduce the 9% by volume to 6.75% which is a drop of 2.25% in the total number of items littered.

Looking at the comparison figures for the period 2005 to 2016 there have already been drops each year so why the rush to implement what became a flawed and expensive Container Deposit Scheme.


The document proceeds to talk about South Australia but only mentions the reduction in containers, it does not talk about a substantial increase in bottle lids.

Checking the statistics on containers does show a decrease in South Australia on the number of beverage containers in the CSIRO Marine Debris Project Final Report Aug 2014.

It’s not all roses in South Australia however because Australian container recyclers refuse to take bottle lids and you have to remove them before you return them. The rest of the world that have container refund schemes take the lids including the machines that crush them in the store so they don’t need to be removed. The flaw in Australia’s recycling is that in South Australia a substantial number of the lids are thrown away and end up on the beaches, in the water, parks and everywhere litter is found. The logical solution to this would be to require the recycling facilities to take the full complete bottle with lid and recycle or dispose of the plastic lid.

In Queensland this is also a safety issue because apparently when being crushed the pressure created can cause the lid to fly off and injure or kill.

The Strategy document claims that the cost of collecting litter in 2016 for councils, public and private land managers and community groups is $180 million per year with claimed savings from a Container Refund Scheme of $45 million a year.

The Real Figures

The NSW Government figures which will frankly be no doubt over-inflated show a reduction in litter of 2.25% however this comes at a cost, a huge cost that all beverage consumers are paying.

In the first three months of the scheme from December 2017 to February 2018 the scheme took in $110 million in deposits and paid out $8.3 million leaving the bottlers with a profit of $101.7 million or $406.8 million for the year.

As is usual in Australia the NSW Government did not want any responsibility for managing the scheme so allowed the five largest beverage companies to set up the Exchange for Change which is used to run and manage the NSW Container Deposit Scheme. This didn’t stop them for hiring over 18 staff to “oversee” the scheme.

Asahi, Carlton United Breweries, Coca-Cola Amatil, Coopers and Lion eagerly setup this new scheme as the NSW Government made no allowances for deposits that are not claimed so these are returned as profit from the scheme to the beverage companies. When does the idiocracy stop? Are the village idiots given priority in government positions?

December 2017 to March 2018 saw 1.556 billion eligible containers were sold in NSW but only 204 million were returned which is 13.1%. Assuming this rate remains the same this is an additional cost to consumers of $406.8 million per year. One of the benefits of this Container Refund Scheme was to reduce the cost for councils in collecting litter but with such a low rate of returns this is unlikely to occur in any meaningful way and the beverage manufacturers are profiting in an obscene manner when these funds would cover the councils costs of litter collection nearly three times.

According to the Return and Earn Media Release each container has between 11.13c and 14.07c added to it but this is based on a much higher recovery percentage so not only is their profit in making it hard for consumers to claim but also in the overstated costs per container. This is a win-win for the companies who setup the scheme and who keep all the excess funds.

Updated figures for December 2017 to January 2019 (14 months but the ABC call it 15 months!?!?!?).

5.446 billion eligible containers sold in this period and 1.3 billion returned has increased the rate of the return to 23% which is lower then it was when they were collected in the roadside recycling bins. However Government figures have it at 54%, are we being lied to again?

Lies, Lies and more Lies

The NSW Environmental Protection Agency’s business case for the setup of a Container Deposit Scheme stated that eligible containers were recycled at a rate of 53%. Other government documents put it at 50% and the following document from the NSW Government puts it at up to 60% and note that they mention that hoarding may occur in the leadup to the Container Deposit Scheme.

We have assumed that the Return and Earn scheme must be prepared to fund a potentially high total recovery rate in the initial months, with NSW kerbside recycling already recovering
as much as 60% of all supplied containers based on available statistics, and the potential for container hoarding prior to December 2017.

NSW Government Return and Earn Scheme Costs | August 2017

The NSW Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton claimed that container recycling had jumped 69% in the twelve months since the scheme began from 32% to 54%.

Which is true?

Looking at key points in the Ministers media release and it looks like the Container Deposit Scheme has been an outstanding success despite the massive cost but has it?

NSW Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton said Return and Earn has been an outstanding success and changed the way people dispose of empty drink containers.

Eligible drink containers collected and recycled: up by 69 per cent
Eligible drink container litter volume: down 44 per cent
NSW total litter volume: down 48 per cent since 2013

“More than half the drink containers in the marketplace (54 per cent) are now being recovered, compared with the 32 per cent that was being collected in yellow bins before Return and Earn kicked in.

“While litter volume has pleasingly dropped across all litter categories, the largest reduction is from eligible drink containers which now represent an all-time low of 37 per cent of the NSW litter volume stream,” Ms Upton said.

“This means the Premier’s target of a reducing litter in NSW by 40 per cent cut by 2020 is going to be well and truly met – and then some.

“This shows the impact and undeniable success of Return and Earn on reducing litter across the state.

Return and Earn: A billion reasons to celebrate | 2nd of December 2018

Where does the 32% figure come from when NSW Environmental Protection Agency’s figure was 53% and the schemes own figures are up to 60%?

The figure was based on the EPA looking at a cross selection of recycling bins in 29 council areas across the state with 100 households from each council area selected for examination. Households were notified beforehand and were able to opt out. So not only is this not a proper audit of the bins as you have notified residents and given them an opt out right but this audit was performed TWO months AFTER the scheme started so people were stockpiling them to return them so the results are worthless..

So the NSW Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton is using a figure that was collected in a manner that is stupid beyond all comprehension and ignoring all the previous figures because they show that this scheme has achieved nothing! When are politicians going to be held accountable for lying to and misleading citizens to cover up the fact that they have wasted BILLIONS of taxpayer money on a scheme that does nothing!

Ms Upton said that, as a result of Return and Earn, eligible drink container litter volume has dropped by 44 per cent and now represents an all-time low of 37 per cent of the NSW litter volume stream.

Return and Earn breaks records | 18th of January 2018

This is outright deception by the Minister Gabrielle Upton. The recycling rate has increased from 53% to 54% so how it is possible for the litter volume to drop by 7%?

At best the NSW Container Deposit Scheme has increased recycling by 1% and at worst they have decreased by 6%. The true figure is probably somewhere in between so the billions of dollars in setting up the scheme and lost productivity have all be for nothing.

Minister Gabrielle Upton unable to do the maths!

Is it asking too much for a minister earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, a generous pension and a large team of staff to actually know their portfolio?

NSW Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton has dodged questions from Ben Fordham over a crucial Return and Earn detail.

Ms Upton insists the container deposit scheme is now “steady” and going “real places” but can’t give a figure on how many containers are going through the vending machines as a percentage of how many containers are sold.

“There are almost 640 million drink containers through the system since it began,” the Minister says.

Ben, “Does that work out to be 10 per cent of the total number of containers that are sold? Or 25 per cent or 50 per cent?”

Minister Upton, “Look, it is a percentage of the drink containers that are sold. Not every drink container, Ben, is going to be put through the system. People are making a choice.”

Ben, “But what is it? 50 per cent? Do you know what it is?”

Despite not being able to answer the question, Ms Upton says the figure wouldn’t determine “whether this scheme is a success”.

“There are many millions of drinks that are eligible to be returned, sold every day,” she says.

“People make choices about whether they will claim back a deposit.

“The strong numbers, just under 640 million drink containers, indicates that lots and lots of people every day are returning it and participating in the scheme.”

Ben has since crunched the numbers, and has the figures.

“The return rate is 27 per cent,” he says. “So out of 100 containers sold, 27 are handed in on average.

“So if 640 million have been handed in in total, the total number of containers sold since December 1, would be approximately 2.3 billion.”

‘Do you know what it is?’ | 30th of August 2018

What other costs are there for the NSW Container Deposit Scheme?

The NEW environmental protection agency requires 18.5 FTE (Full Time Equivalent) staff to oversee the Container Deposit Scheme. The cost of these staff? $2.8 million per year.

NSW Container Deposit Scheme
EPA’s fees for monitoring, compliance and approving containers
24 September 2018

Return and Earn Depots

I’m not going to go into these for NSW, the fact is that there are too few places to return and they don’t have many Reverse Vending Machines (RVM). The system is poorly implemented like the Queensland system and billions of dollars have been wasted on schemes that just make no sense in anyway.

It would have been cheaper, had minimal impact on the environment, had a very high container return rate and been a lot quicker to implement to have Reverse Vending Machines fitted to most supermarkets. This way the consumer can return the containers when they do their shopping next, no need for special trips, no environmental issues with all the travel, no time wasted as it becomes part of your grocery shopping, no need to register to multiple services nor have to work out how it works at another deport. All you do is insert your containers and when you are done you receive a voucher for the supermarket which you can also receive cash for.

The Next Generation of Queensland drivers licence is going to be digital but at what cost?

The Queensland Government not content with their last attempt at a smart drivers licence that will cost us a BILLION dollars by 2025 to 2030 is now creating another solution for a problem that doesn’t exist. It’s 2003 all over again as the bullshit starts to fly from the mouths of ministers. One of the big selling points of the “Smart Licence” that started in 2003 was the ability to control what information people could see but in the end we received a $1,000,000,000 version of the old drivers license on a new piece of plastic!

The new story of the digital drivers license starts in 2018 after yet another minister has read too much about blockchain and these new fangled digital wallets.

Queensland driver licences next in line for digital evolution

24th of October 2018 | Media Statements

Queenslanders use their driver licence to rent a house, open a bank account, book Airbnb, or check-in to a hotel. A digital driver licence will allow people to do all of this via their mobile device.

We’re not phasing out physical licences but we think people should be given the choice to have a digital option, if that’s their preference

Unlike a physical driver licence, the digital wallet gives you control about how much information you allow a third party to see, copy and retain.

A digital wallet can be more secure than a physical licence as security features include the ability to verify a digital wallet by scanning a QR code or similar.

A pilot for the digital wallet could be ready in second half of 2019.

There will also be the opportunity to include other services in the future, including allowing customers to change their address, renew their licence and pay their registration fees through the digital wallet.

This initiative aligns with Palaszczuk Government’s priority to deliver an easy to use and accessible digital service that meets the needs of the community.

Transport and Main Roads Minister Mark Bailey | 24th of October 2018

Mr Bailey said a procurement process to engage a vendor to develop a digital wallet and supporting platforms would start soon, with an industry briefing event being held on 26 October.

Great so just like the previous “smart” drivers licence project that was an utter failure because it was driven by the vendors we are going down the same path again. Why not work with the other states on this and come up with a system that works across all states and territories instead of going solo? Why not look at what they do overseas? And more to the point why not sort out all the issues with the current physical drivers licence and replace it with one that is much cheaper and uses current technology?


Planning for the future – Digital Wallet and Enabling Platforms

Since 1910 when paper driver licences were first introduced, Queenslanders have been using it for more than just driving. Driver licences are now used for a wide range of transactions, from renting a house, to purchasing medication, applying for a mortgage and booking a hotel. Businesses have made licences the dominant form of identity.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads are in the early stages of developing a convenient, safer, and smarter way for you to store your Queensland Government identification cards, like a driver licence or proof of age card, on a mobile device, instead of carrying a physical one.

The Digital Wallet provides a range of benefits:

  • Security—it’s more secure than a physical product and will include extra security features to ensure your data is protected against cybercrimes and theft. For example, if you lose your phone anyone finding it will have to by-pass your device security (if enabled) then the security in the digital wallet.
  • Control—You will be able to control what information you share with others. For example if you need to prove your age, the wallet will allow the person checking to see your photo and confirm your age, but not see your name or where you live.
  • Convenience—you will be able to update your details immediately, at any time of the day, and receive notifications when your licence is due.
  • Real time information—any changes to your licence will be immediately updated in the wallet.

What’s next
We’ve started the procurement process to engage vendor partners to develop the Digital Wallet and Enabling Platforms, with a pilot program to commence late 2019. The pilot will be developed in consultation with customers, police and other key stakeholders to ensure key features are accessible and are designed to meet the needs of the community. Following feedback from the pilot, the wallet will be implemented across the state. Additional features may be added in the future as customers’ and stakeholders’ needs arise.

About the program
The Customer Orientated Registration and Licencing program has been established to modernise Queensland’s registration and licensing system. The program aims to deliver digital and business solutions that simplify and improve the way our customers interact with us.

The program will focus on how to re-think service design from a human-centred approach, simplify processes, regulatory, legislative and policy drivers, and build the next generation of digital platforms that enable those outcomes, in partnership with our customers.

We’re establishing a Digital Wallet, and Enabling Platforms that will allow Queenslanders to have their driver licences and other Queensland Government issued products available digitally on their mobile devices should they choose to do so.

Program vision
The Department’s vision is “A single integrated transport network accessible to everyone”.

We have several key goals that form the core to enabling the Department’s vision:

  • A single view of our customer, for our customers
  • Simplify our process and policy/legislative drivers to make the customer experience better and our systems simpler
  • Connect our business, our partners and our customers
  • Exit our legacy platforms in a practical, sustainable way that adds value to our business
  • All of this is underwritten by the principles of faster, cheaper, better, safer outcomes of the program. The Digital Wallet and Enabling Platforms are the first steps to achieving these goals.

Partnering with industry
We are partnering with industry to develop a Digital Wallet and Enabling Platforms. The aim of this procurement activity is to engage vendor/s or a consortia to develop 2 solutions:

Digital Wallet
An application on a mobile device that can store credentials such as licences in a secure fashion. These credentials can be managed by the owner and provide access as well as pay for services and other products.

Enabling Platforms
A group of technologies that are used as a foundation platform to develop other applications, processes or technologies.

The Digital Wallet will need new foundation technology that will allow it to link credentials to products and services within our department. Once the pilot is complete, this Enabling Platforms can be used and leveraged by other services across the government sector as well as allow the department to transition its legacy platforms to support new ways of working.

For more information about the procurement of the Digital Wallet and Enabling Platforms opportunity, please email the ICT Procurement team.

Original page here

Will digital licences be available in QLD?

24th of October 2018 | RACQ

RACQ Head of Technical and Safety Policy Steve Spalding said this kind of technology would be an added convenience for drivers.

“Many of us are already cashless and using smartphones to pay for our goods and do our banking so this is clearly the next step,” Mr Spalding said.

“If we can get the security right – as we have with internet banking, this will really make it easier for many drivers who don’t want to carry so many cards around.

How is it an added convenience? It’s all very well to say these things but I cannot see how this is an added convenience. Cashless? How many people are really cashless, yet another buzzword to throw around.

And security for internet banking is clearly not “right” as it still has major flaws that need to be addressed. RACQ has raised none of the security issues but just fully supported this.

If you want to carry around less cards maybe the Queensland Government could deliver on all the promises it made with the previous driver licence project that the RACQ supported despite it being a total failure at a huge cost the motorists that RACQ claims to represent.

RACQ could spend some time looking at other countries and how they managed drivers licences and other ID along with the risks before supporting the Queensland Government.

Here are some questions you could ask and get answers to for the Motorists you “claim” to represent.

Questions that haven’t be asked by the media, the RACQ or anyone else regarding the “digital” driver licence

  • What happens if your mobile has a flat battery?
  • How can emergency services access the digital card if they can’t unlock you phone at the scene of an accident?
  • What happens if you travel overseas or to another state where they don’t recognise your “digital” drivers licence?
  • How much is the “digital” drivers licence going to cost?
  • What happens if your “digital” licence is compromised and used to hire vehicles, tools and trailers? Who is liable for this?
  • How does the person accepting the licence keep a record of it? Now they can scan it, photocopy it or take a photo but what happens with a digital licence?
  • What will be the cost to modify systems for businesses who use licences for ID such are renting a car, house, trailer or tools.
  • What happens if a business refuses to accept the “digital” drivers licence?
  • What happens if your phone is lost and is unlocked?
  • What if you phone is stolen and unlocked?
  • If you get pulled over by the police will they need to take your phone back to their vehicle in an unlocked state and given that this allows the police to look through your phone legally now what legislation is going to be in place to protect drivers?
  • What if the police when looking at your phone at the drivers licence see a message come up that indicated possible criminal activity, are there going to be safeguards in place for all or just some types of crime?
  • What if there is no internet when you need to show your drivers licence?
  • What if the TMR systems are down and you need to show your drivers licence?
  • What role will the company providing this service have in being able to access and alter licence information?
  • Will there be a 24 hour helpline in the event of problems?
  • Will this digital drivers licence be location aware and track your movements?

Other States

Each state has a completely different approach using a different vendor and a different method of implementation along with different features.

South Australia

Total spent on digital drivers licence so far $1.919 million.

(for the app with Appvation)

Dropped their previous app which had 270,000 users called EzyReg.

“Premier Jay Weatherill said physical licences and other passes would remain available for the foreseeable future.”

Digital Pass and Licence

Do you still need a physical card?
While digital passes and licences are now available in South Australia, some organisations and businesses may not be set up to validate your digital pass or licence.

An organisation or business may request that you present your physical licence, so it is recommended that you continue to carry your physical licence with you just in case, especially when you travel interstate or overseas.

New South Wales

Based on blockchain technology. Why? Because they can. $$$$

Total spent on digital drivers licence so far $17.8 million

  • Invested $8.5 million in the 2017-2018 budget towards the rollout of digital drivers licences and the Dubbo trial.
  • $9.3 million in the 2018-2019 budget to rollout across the state by the end of 2019.

If the driver’s phone has a flat battery, cracked screen or other problems that mean that card details cannot be read they will be treated the same as failing to product a physical licence.

Digital Driver Licence

New road rules in Australia that will do nothing but kill people, logic once again out the window!

At first glance the road rules introduced by South Australia and now NSW and Victoria are there to save lives but the reality is all they do is kill people. No-one is suggesting that emergency workers do not deserve protection on the road but the rules introduced to save them have done anything but and have costs lives, people licenses and created confusion where you have different laws in different states that have not been communicated properly to the drivers especially those from interstate.

This points again to the problems with Australia where each state whilst following the Australian Road Rules also introduce their own laws without any regard to other states nor looking at the experiences in other countries.

These are the road rules in question for each of the states that have introduced them and following them is the simple rule that all drivers across Australia should be using.

South Australia

Drivers are now required to travel at 25km/h when driving through an emergency service speed zone. This law came into effect on 1 September 2014.

The 25km/h Emergency Service Speed Zone applies on an area of road:

  • In the immediate vicinity of an emergency service vehicle that has stopped on the road and is displaying a flashing blue or red light; or
  • Between two sets of flashing blue or red lights that have been placed by an emergency worker at either end of a length of road on which an emergency vehicle has stopped.
  • It does not apply if you are driving on a road that is divided by a median strip and the emergency service speed zone is on the other side of the road beyond the median strip.

An emergency services vehicle includes:

  • Ambulance
  • Fire service vehicle (CFS, MFS or Federal Aviation Rescue)
  • State Emergency Services (SES) vehicle
  • Police.

Penalties are the same as speeding, if in a 80, 100 or 110kph zone and you can’t or don’t slow down you face immediate loss of license no matter what state you come from.

Victoria

From 1 July 2017 you must slow down to a speed that would enable you to stop safely when approaching and passing enforcement, emergency or escort vehicles that are stationary or moving slowly (less than 10km/h)*, and have either:

  • Red and blue flashing lights
  • Magenta (purple flashing lights)
  • An alarm sounding.

You must not exceed 40km/h when passing the vehicle and not increase your speed until a safe distance from the scene (more on this below).

The new road rule does not apply to vehicles on the opposite side of a divided road (separated by a median strip) from an emergency or enforcement vehicle scene.

  • A fire truck extinguishing roadside spot fires is an example of a slow moving emergency vehicle.

A ‘safe distance’ has not been defined in the road rule because every incident will be different.

The infringement penalty for breaching the new road rule is 1.75 penalty units ($272.05), with the maximum court penalty of 5 penalty units ($777.30). No demerit points apply.

NSW

The new rule from the 1st of September 2018 requires motorists to slow down to 40km/h when passing a stationary emergency vehicle displaying blue or red flashing lights.

The rule also requires motorists to give way to any person on foot in the immediate area of the emergency vehicle. Motorists should not increase their speed until they are a safe distance past the vehicle.

For everyone’s safety, motorists must slow down to 40km/h when passing stationary emergency vehicles displaying blue or red flashing lights
The rule applies to vehicles travelling in both directions, unless the road is divided by a median strip

Motorists who do not comply with the rule will face a $448 fine and three demerit points with the maximum court penalty of $2,200.

Western Australia

SLOMO (Slow Down, Move Over) law was introduced on the 2nd of March 2018.

The SLOMO law requires drivers to slow down to 40 km/h when approaching specific stationary emergency vehicles which are displaying flashing lights while attending an incident.

SLOMO applies to all emergency service vehicles and first response personnel who need to attend to roadside incidents very quickly. Their priority is the safety and survival of the person requiring assistance.

As well as emergency vehicles, SLOMO includes tow trucks, RAC roadside assistance patrol vehicles, and Main Roads Incident Response Vehicles, which assist with the removal of broken down vehicles and debris.

Vehicles travelling in oncoming traffic from the other direction will not be required to slow down.

However, if there is an incident that has occurred in the middle of the road or on a median strip for instance, traffic in both directions would be required to slow down if lanes in both directions are affected by an incident.

The penalty for this offence is three demerit points and $300.

Summary

Four states with four different laws that apply to different vehicles.

  • South Australia fines you for exceeding the 25kph speed limit and loss of license is easy, another state has a fine but no demerit points and two other states have different demerit points and fines.
  • Victoria requires you to slow for slow moving or stationary vehicles and the other three only for stationary.
  • West Australia requires you to move over where possible, the other three do not.
  • West Australia also doesn’t apply to traffic coming in the other direction without a median strip whereas the others do.
  • Each state applies the laws to different emergency vehicles and one includes roadside service.
  • Every state has different interpretations of how soon you can speed up again.

Problems with implementation

Victoria didn’t enter the correct offence code so all fines had to be withdrawn as three points were assigned to those fines when no points should apply. However police started issued summons to appear in court until the issue was resolved. [source]


It took just one day after Victoria’s new 40km/h speed limit when passing emergency vehicles was introduced before a big truck slammed into the rear of a small sedan writing it off. [source]


A NSW driver who was unaware of the 25km/h rule in South Australia was fined $1007, disqualified from driving for 6 months after driving past two police cars with their red and blue lights on in early 2018 before laws were introduced in NSW. The police were located 12m off the road and she passed them at a speed of 85km/h hour in a 110km/h zone. The driver was a female on her own travelling from Northern NSW to visit friends in Adelaide, she had driven for 49 years with no infringements and had to find a place to store her caravan and organise a lift to get back home. [source]


South Australian Police and RAA suggested an increase in speed to 40km/h”But SAPOL and the RAA said it had led to a potentially dangerous situation on stretches of high-speed road — the South-Eastern Freeway in particular.” The government however refuse to increase the speed. [source]


More ambiguity around the new laws with NSW Roads Minister, Melinda Pavey claiming that it’s up motorists how fast they slow down and to what speed. “In response to these concerns, NSW Roads Minister, Melinda Pavey, said it is up to motorists to assess whether it is safe to slow all the way down to 40km/h.

“To slam your breaks on to get down to 40 is dangerous and no one expects people to be driving in an unsafe manner,” she told ABC radio.

“We must be aware of what is behind us, appreciating and respecting that it takes a truck a lot longer to slow down.”” [source]


Cop injured under emergency speed rule [source]

What should we do?

Implement an Australian wide law similar to the United States move over laws which refer to requiring drivers to give a one lane buffer to stopped emergency vehicles. For example, while driving in the right lane, if the driver sees a stopped police car, the driver is required to move one lane over to the left to give enough buffer space to avoid any potential accidents.

Communicate changes to laws such as this by including an insert with vehicle registration papers as not everyone watches TV or reads News Papers to see advertising that is costly and ineffective. Distribute for free printed road rule refreshers at newsagencies, service stations and car servicing locations. Given that most people have to fill their car advertise road rule changes on the pumps or other parts of the service station.

The idea that it’s safe to have to brake heavily from 110km/h to 40km/h or 25km/h shows just how out of touch our lawmakers are.

Another system to use in conjunction with the United States move over laws is to look at how they deal with this in Germany with their unrestricted autobahns, police use a digital sign in the rear window to indicate to the driver to follow and they pull over in a safe location away from the road. Another easy solution to this problem that the Australian Governments will never consider just like the United States one above.

Simply put, Australian Governments will never introduce clear uniform laws across all the states.

Just when you thought that Queensland’s Container Refund Scheme was already complicated along come additional inane requirements!

The companies and organisations involved in the Container Refund Scheme (CRS) have their own rules on how containers are to be returned and with very few sites having Reverse Vending Machines they require you to register your details including bank account, bag up the containers, return them to a Container Refund Point and wait up to six weeks for a refund after they are manually counted.

If the manual count gives a substantially lower number like it has for many people there is no avenue to dispute this.

Each of these Container Refund Points have their own rules on the types of bags, some will provide you bags but often run out and if this is the case you have to travel to another CRP until you find one with bags that you can use. Most of the Container Refund Points will not let you use single use bags, instead you have to buy from the supermarket stronger multiple use bags and nearly all of them will not accept black bags for the safety of the sorting staff so this requires the purchase of more expensive clear bags.

Now one of the companies that requires you to use their own orange coloured bags Envirobank require you to put in exactly 50 containers, no more and no less or they will declare the bag as ineligible (see below for details). But it continues to get better, you cannot drop off 11 bags or more, if you have 501 containers or more you have to go to a depot and make a Statutory Deceleration which will require you to find a Justice of the Peace to witness the signature. All this for $50.10 or more! You couldn’t make this up!

Checking their website there is no mention of the 50 container requirement on their How It Works page which shows a very simple process. Further to this they operate an ineligible bag policy that allows them to keep the containers and void your payment so if you put in 49 or 51 containers it’s goodbye refund!

I checked the Queensland Legislation on this and can find no reference to 500 containers however found that NSW requires a statutory declaration to be made that you purchased the containers in NSW so it’s unknown if they impose this requirement in Queensland or not.

Queensland Legislation does contain this however but it is not clear where and when this applies.

Division 3 Refund amounts for empty containers 20 Bulk quantity—Act, s99T New section 20 defines bulk quantity, for the purposes of providing a refund declaration to a container refund point operator, as at least 1,500 empty containers.

Container Refund Scheme Regulation 2018

Looking at their terms of service shows even more strange requirements including their right to keep your containers without paying you compensation if you include any ineligible containers or waste.

This is also confirmed on a popular forum.

One of the recycling scheme vendors in Queensland (Envirobank) just announced that they will only accept bags that have exactly 50 containers in it. If you have less, you forfeit the entire bag. I exclusively use 1.25L bottles and therefore it is impossible to get 50 into a bag. This is getting beyond ridiculous. I clearly won’t use them anymore but my incentive to use this scheme in general is further diminished.

Whirlpool Post

The even have instructions on how to use the bags, instead of creating a bag that is easy to use they have instead forced the onus onto those returning containers to figure out a solution.

Q. How do I close my orange bags properly?

A. It may seem like a silly question, but it’s more complicated than you think.

You know that the product your delivering is overly complex when you need such lengthy instructions on closing a bag and which make you have such lengthy terms and conditions and terms of service.

All this for a Container Refund Scheme that is truly a fantastic example of Idiocracy. The CRS could have required Reverse Vending Machines to be installed at Supermarkets so you can return your containers from the place you purchased them from when you go shopping. But why go simple, logical and cheap when you can do the opposite?