Queensland Container Refund Scheme False Recycling Claims and Statistics

Figures provided by Ministers, Departments and Container Exchange have often been misleading at best and comparisions have been difficult to make due to inconsistent and differing methods being used for calculation of relevant statistics.

Depending on what suits their agenda at the time you have annual consumption figures for containers of “up to 3 Billion” and “over 2.4 Billion”.

Containers for Change and Container Exchange are fond of quoting the figure of 30 to 35% for past recycling rates when in the 2017-2018 financial Year immediately before the commencement of the Container Recycling Scheme it was 45%.

There needs to be an independent audit performed of the embarrassing Container Recycling Scheme with a view to replacing it with a supermarket Reverse Vending Machine system like Germany and other countries.

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

Recycling Percentages

Before the start of the Container Refund Scheme recycling rate was 45% but immediately afterwards it dropped to 38.5% before increasing to 41.6% 4 months later however the claims from Government and Container Exchange was that they were recycling 62%!

This is easily proven incorrect yet the media have not picked up on this and the only other questions around this have been from from an interstate environmental group who calculated it at 33% and were attacked by Container Exchange and protected by the Minister who claimed there was no need for an audit.

  • Recycling Rate 2017-2018 FY = 45%

Containers for Change started on the 1st of November 2018

  • Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 06/2019 = 38.5% (calculated)
  • Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 10/2019 = 62% (claimed)
  • Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 10/2019 = 41.6% (calculated)

Reduction in Litter

One claim that has been thrown into the Container Exchange Annual Report for 2018-2019 on page 8 is the 35% reduction in litter between November 1 2018 to presumably the end of January 2019 which is a 3 month period.

Container Exchange Annual Report for 2018-2019 on page 8

The Minister said that there was a reduction in litter in the environment of about 35% in a media statement on the 7th of September 2019 | 800 million containers now returned through Containers for Change. No mention was made that this was beverage container litter and this is another deliberate attempt to overestimate the benefits of a flawed scheme.

Minister Enoch said across Queensland, the container refund scheme had helped reduce litter in the environment by about 35%.

Leeanne Enoch | 800 million containers now returned through Containers for Change

Details of this survey can only be found in the Department of Environment and Science Annual Report for 2018-2019 on page 36 where there was an omission that this was as survey conducted in February 2019.

Department of Environment and Science Annual Report for 2018-2019 on page 36

Calculations

A number of figures have been supplied by the Queensland State Government for the total number of bottles and cans covered by the Container Refund Scheme.

Neary 3 Billion by the Minister responsible at the time Dr Steven Miles in the Implementing Queensland’s Container Refund Scheme Discussion paper from April 2017.

In a Media Statement by Steven Miles on the 22nd of July 2016 he quoted the figure of 2.4 Billion and this figure has been used by numerous media and other organisations as late as 2019. As this is the lower figure this will be used for calculations as it will only increase the percentage.

In the Queensland Productivity Commission report on Container Refund Scheme Price Monitoring Review the claim is 2.8 Billion containers per year. The final report is here.

Containers Exchange claimed a 63% redemption rate based on 38% via Container Refund Points and 25% via material recovery facilities (council etc).

To estimate costs (Table 4.1), the Commission used scheme prices and data on volumes provided by COEX. The data includes the volumes of eligible containers sold in Queensland per month, by material type, for the period 1 November 2018 to 30 April 2019.

The direct cost of the scheme per container ranges between 4.59 and 5.36 cents, depending on the type of material in containers. The predicted container redemption rate is 63 per cent, which implies an average refund of 6.3 cents per container.
To calculate the direct cost of the scheme, the Commission took the total of 1.4 billion containers sold into the market in the first six months of the scheme’s operation 4 and, for each month, categorised the volumes by material type and then multiplied those volumes by the scheme price for that type of material.

4 Redemption rates used included: (a) 38 per cent returned through container refund points; and (b) 25 per cent returned through material recovery facilities. Data supplied by COEX.

August 2019 | Container Refund Scheme Price Monitoring Review

It’s not possible to work it out from the initial figures in the first Annual Report as there are loans included in the amount and containers by customers were stored from before the scheme started and cashed in based on the large numbers the first weeks of operation.

Recycling Rate 2017-2018 FY = 45%
Containers Sold in 2017-2018 Financial Year = 2.4 BILLION
Recycling Rate for 2017-2018 FY = 45% *1
*1 Thanks a billion: Container scheme transforms Queensland recycling

Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 06/2019 = 38.5%
Containers Sold in 11/2018 to 06/2019 = 1.6 BILLION *1
Calculated Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 06/2019 = 38.5%*2
Claimed Recycling Numbers 11/2018 to 06/2019 = 617 MILLION*3
*1 Using the 2017-2018 figure across eight month period.
*2 .617/1.6 = 38.5%
*3 Container Exchange Annual Report 2018-2019
[Note: using the figures in the annual report for 2018-2019 show this figure to by 28% based on income from containers and payments to customers – as this was the first year of operation this figure may be slightly distorted so will not be used for this calculation]

Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 10/2019 = 62% or 41.6%
Containers Sold November 2018 to October 2019 = 2.4 BILLION
Claimed Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 10/2019 = 62% *1
Calculated Recycling Rate 11/2018 to 10/2019 = 41.6% *2
Claimed Recycling Numbers 11/2018 to 10/2019 = 1 BILLION
*1 Thanks a billion: Container scheme transforms Queensland recycling
*2 1/2.4 = 41.6%
[The TEC survey claims a 33% recycling rate, this is assumed to be based on the 3 Billion container figure so I have not included it above but it shows how far the Queensland Government supplied figures are from the truth.]

Low to Mid 30s Claims

In 2017-18, the figure improved to 45 per cent.

Now, after the first 12 months of the state government-backed cash for containers scheme, the rate is 62 per cent.

Containers for Change spokesman Adam Nicholson said COEX – the company that runs the scheme – calculated Queensland’s recycling rate after the billion cans were recycled since November 2018.

“We were the worst-littered state and we were down in the low to mid 30s for our recycling rate,” Mr Nicholson said.

Thanks a billion: Container scheme transforms Queensland recycling | 1st of November 2019

44% and 3 Billion Containers

The main page of the Container Exchange and Containers for Change Website states the 44% figure for the year before they started operation along with the 3 Billion containers per year.

In recent years, Queensland has had one of the lowest recycling rates in Australia at around 44%. Each year, around 3 billion drink containers are generated in Queensland alone and are the second most littered item.

11th of April 2020 | Container Exchange Main Page
11th of April 2020 | Container Exchange Main Page
11th of April 2020 | Containers for Change Main Page

$25 Million to Charity Organisations

Steven Miles the Minister responsible at the time included a claim in a media statement on the 22nd of July 2016 that $25 million could be made by community organisations each year. In the 8 months from November 2018 to June 2019 a total of $863,897 was paid to Charities and Community Groups [page 8 – Financial Report].

Minister claims Queensland Container Recycling Scheme a “Resounding Success” amongst Criticism

The Criticism

After criticism of the Queensland Containers for Change recycling scheme by a Sydney based environmental lobby group following a review in February 2020, Queensland Environment Minister Leeanne Enoch said the scheme has been a “resounding success”.

Looking at the figures for the first 8 months of operation show that the scheme had revenue of $195 million from consumer deposits and a return to customers of only $55 million. The remainder was used to run an efficient, wasteful and damaging to the environment scheme. This is a 28% container return rate and by 2022 the target is 85% from a system that is unworkable.

According to the Minister Leeanne Enoch not only is this World Class but this is a Resounding Success!

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

Similar findings and complaints have been raised on this website and there are many complaints from users of the service that mirror the claims made by the lobby group.

In the Brisbane Times article NSW lobby group slams Queensland’s ‘ramshackle’ recycling scheme on the 8th of April 2020, Container Exchange went further and called the Total Environment Centre’s report a “bad faith survey” and claimed the figures were “wrong” before going on to claim a link between a “rival container refund scheme” in NSW and the TEC.

A furious CoEx spokesperson Adam Nicholson said Queensland’s scheme was “deliberately a mix” of large operators (TOMRA and Envirobank) supported by myriad small businesses, which are now affected by coronavirus.

“The Containers for Change scheme has been very popular with Queenslanders in its first 18 months of operation and there is strong competition for the remaining opportunities to participate,” he said.

“We are aware that several of our larger operators are lobbying for more opportunities, in southeast Queensland especially.”

TEC said their survey was run between February 22 and March 9 this year before the impact of coronavirus closed businesses.

TEC’s executive director, Jeff Angel, said Queensland’s system was “ramshackle”, with a variety of refund points.

“A lot of these refund points do not work very well, or do not exist,” Mr Angel said. “It’s just not a robust system that can sustain convenience and high recycling rates.

“We are now calling on the Queensland government to subject the Container Refund Scheme to a comprehensive in-depth review and have power to exert greater control over CoEx.”

Mr Angel said the first billion containers collected by November 2019 reflected a 33 per cent recycling rate.

“Their target [CoEx’s] is 85 per cent by 2022, set by the government. But there doesn’t seem to be any intention to increase the number of refund points.

“They really have to reach 2 billion containers in this coming year. They are not going to achieve that.”

Mr Nicholson questioned the timing and funding behind the survey.

“I would question the motivation, and the funding source, of a NSW not-for-profit sending resources across the border to check opening hours and days of Queensland businesses at a time when most of NSW was focused on the deadly pandemic arriving on our shores.”

Container Exchange spokesperson Adam Nicholson is engaged in shooting the messenger instead of answering the issues raised. These are the same issues this website have raised and the comments of real customers have echoed these. The Queensland Container Refund Scheme is a nothing but a sham operation that is poorly run, is inefficient and damaging to the environment.

The TEC Findings

What the Total Environment Centre found in CoEx’s Queensland scheme:

  • The 44 over-the-counter manual and reverse vending machine depots (run by recycling giant TOMRA) worked very well;
  • Of 129 refund point locations reviewed, 14 did not exist or were closed and 35 were not operating correctly;
  • Many bag drop sites had no signage other than on the container, at times making it hard to locate the recycling site;
  • Many of the 64 bag drop sites did not provide bags or directions on how to obtain bags to put into the counting container;
  • Doubts exist that the scheme can help achieve the required 85 per cent recycling rate.

What does Queensland’s scheme consist of?

  • 64 bag drops (13 Gold Coast, 9 Logan, 5 Ipswich, 14 central/East Brisbane, 9 north Brisbane, 11 Sunshine Coast/Noosa, 3 Moreton Bay)
  • 35 over-the-counter depots (6 Gold Coast, 7 Logan, 5 Ipswich, 4 central/East Brisbane, 5 north Brisbane, 3 Sunshine Coast/Noosa, 5 Moreton Bay)
  • 7 mobile/pop-up points (4 Ipswich, 1 central/East Brisbane, 2 Moreton Bay)
  • 9 reverse vending machine (RVM)/drop-off depots (1 Gold Coast, 2 Logan, 2 Ipswich, 2 central/East Brisbane, 1 north Brisbane, 1 Sunshine Coast/Noosa)
  • 14 centres did not exist or were closed (5 Gold Coast, 8 north Brisbane, 1 Moreton Bay)

The Minister

In the Brisbane Times article Qld recycling scheme a ‘resounding success’ so no audit needed, says minister published on the 9th of April 202 the Minster Leeanne Enoch said the system was operating efficiently.

Containers for Change has been a resounding success

Queenslanders are passionate about recycling and we’ve seen that, with the return of over 1.6 billion containers so far.

That’s over $160 million in refunds that has been returned to individuals, schools and charities.

The scheme has also created over 700 new jobs, many in regional Queensland.

In establishing the Queensland scheme, we learned from the mistakes of New South Wales and established a model that creates jobs, while also ensuring people can return their containers in a variety of different ways

That includes the depots, bag drops and reverse vending machines, as well as mobile services to ensure rural and remote communities have access to the scheme.

Obviously from the results, you can see this is working

Our government established the container refund scheme in November 2018 and we regularly monitor its performance

In the first six months of its operation, an independent assessment of the scheme was undertaken, and the Department of Environment and Science has been acting on its findings to make sure Containers for Change continues to deliver this service for Queenslanders.

CoEx … has targets that have been established in legislation for container recovery and container refund point accessibility,” she said. “Those targets have not changed.

Queensland Environment Minister Leeanne Enoch

Looking at the Queensland scheme it is obvious that it can never achieve its targets and the only way to do this is to follow the European model discussed in the main article. Not only will this help to achieve the 85% target it will reduce the costs to consumers to close to zero.

The Minister however is unable to admit the scheme is a failure so Queenslanders will continue to fork out hundreds of millions for a system that will never achieve meaningful results instead of introducing a system that would provide a high percentage of returns at minimal cost.

The question that has to be asked is WHY?

Container Exchange Annual Report 2018-2019 | Queensland Container Refund Scheme

This short analysis uses data from the Container Exchange Annual Report and Financial Report for the 2018-2019 Financial Year.

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

World Class Container Refund Scheme?

The first thing that greets you is that on page 7 the claim is made that Queensland has “A world-class beverage container refund scheme”. This is the biggest load of bollocks and no-one with a functioning brain could make such an absurd claim.

  • How does a world class container refund scheme make you have to travel and waste hours of your life jumping through hoops to get back an amount that barely covers your fuel if you’re lucky?
  • How does a world class container refund scheme actually do more harm to the environment?
  • How does a world class refund scheme actually create pointless jobs in menial tasks?

This is a constant issue in Australian politics, Brisbane City Council claim everything they do is World Class when it’s actually the opposite and the Queensland Government is become fond of using the term to describe everything they do. Maybe if politicians were held legally responsible for their claims these useless and pointless terms would no longer be used.

What is a world class container refund scheme? Imaging a scheme where returned the containers to where you purchased them on your next weekly shop requiring no more effort, no more storage until you have a car full and no cost to you? Sounds amazing right? Nope this is how these systems work in places like the EU and have done for many years.

Australia on the other hand decided to create complicated systems with excessive costs and claim they are world class. Other countries build world class systems and don’t feed such bollocks to their populus.

Lies, Lies and more Lies

Launch day saw more than 658,000 containers returned via 252 container refund points across Queensland. More than 7250 individuals, charities, community groups and businesses had registered for scheme IDs with many more opting to receive
cash refunds or sign up to accounts with operators in the scheme.

Container Exchange Annual Report 2018-2019 | Page 10

As per the data provided on the Containers for Change website there were at most 201 Container Refund Points on the first day of operation from their own data. The claim made in their annual report is 252.

Containers for Change have now made it difficult by removing the listing of sites from their website and requiring you to use a map based system to get numbers.

As at the 9th of April 2020 the number of Container Refund Points (CRPs) from their website was 313 but the majority of these are bag drop locations, mobile and pop-ups which are limited hours and days (many are closed as well but are kept on the website).

All Locations | 313 | 09/04/2020

The real number of useful locations is 126 after removing bag drop, mobile and pop-up points.

Over the Counter and Reverse Vending Machine Locations | 126 | 09/04/2020

Closed Locations

Sample of Closed Locations | 126 | 09/04/2020

Reverse Vending Machines are not affected by events like Covid-19 but the World Class Container Refund Scheme that Queensland operates is affected and along with frequent site closing or changing location is a huge issue that the scheme has been unable to manage. It is only with the massive profits that the scheme is able to operate which is a direct cost to the consumer.

Employment

Claimed employment for the scheme is 626 new jobs across the state but what is not stated is the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) number. Most of these jobs are casual and part time. Assuming each job is 1/3rd of a FTE this is 209 jobs at a cost of $673,555 ($140,773,000 running costs divided by 209). The cost is at least 50% higher as this is for an 8 month period and is around $1 million dollars per job.

More than 620 new jobs were created across the state, many in rural and regional economies. Some social enterprises elected to become CRPs as well as raise funds through container refunds, harnessing the dual benefits of increased revenue and employment for clients.

Container Exchange Annual Report 2018-2019 | Page 19

Contact Centre

With the use of Reverse Vending Machines such as Germany there is no need to offer a customer contact centre as the refund is processed on the spot with no need for accounts, logins, providing bank details, waiting weeks or months for payments and disputing payments.

From November 2018 to June 30 2019 the centre received 79,000 queries in total consisting of more than 53,000 calls and 25,000 emails. Of these only 840 were complaints representing just over 1% of total queries.

Container Exchange Annual Report 2018-2019 | Page 23

Given the low value of the transaction and people not wanting to spend time on the phone the 1% complaint rate is likely underreported, the number of complaints on their Facebook and Instagram Page is already a large percentage of these. The low number of complaints is not supported by the number of complaints made to the media and other places like social media.

The Costs of the Scheme

The two figures that really matter is the cost of the program and the amount returned to the consumer. In this scheme it’s around 28% is returned to various customers, this is a recycling figure of 28%. These figures do not take into account loans provided by the state government or stakeholders but these are minimal over the life of the scheme and are to be repaid in future years. The effects of these loans on the figures is minimal and doesn’t change the fact that the CRS is an unmitigated disaster.

  • Revenue of $195,573,000 (deposit on containers sold and sale of recycled goods).
  • Container Refund Expense of $54,800,000 (refund to customers including councils)
  • Surplus after costs $27,927,000 (profit)
  • Operation costs $140,773,000

Many of the expenses following would not exist if a Reverse Vending Model like Europe was adopted, these include most of the following.

  • Container Handling Expenses of $37,594,000
  • Logistics Expenses of $9,320,000
  • Container Processing Expenses $7,539,000
  • Material Recovery Facility Expenses $23,574,000
  • Container Export Rebates $11,903,000 (for containers exported out of Queensland)

Running costs for Financial Year 2018-2019

FY 2018-2019FY 2017-2018
Administrative Fees$6,677,000
Professional Services$5,063,000$5,502,000
Marketing and Communication$3,344,000
Employee Benefits (wages, super)$2,415,000$162
Other Expenses$4,702,000$1,008,000
Finance Costs$2,227,000

Schemes Targets

The Scheme target is 85% of containers recovered by 2022 but the percentage in 2020 is sitting in the low 30’s.

Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk Doesn’t Understand Home Confinement, Movements and Gathering Direction

Is asking for clear communications on what is expected from the Government asking too much? On top of all of the failures from the Queensland Government with the Covid-19 Pandemic including their refusal and/or inability to identify which suburbs are the worst affected, now the Premier shows she doesn’t understand the laws nor their purpose and cannot explain what an area or what a local is.

Any decent politician would know that having clear rules is essential to public support during this time but QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk fully supports the issuing of infringement notices based on an undefined definition of a local or an area. Why not ensure that the rules (that have changed multiple times even within hours of being put in place) are well communicated and clear?

The discussion around the Gold Coast beaches and locals and areas starts at 5:51 and is with the QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and Channel Nine’s Karl Stefanovic and Ally Langdon.

Our frontline workers are in the battlefield

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Ally asks the Premier about the beaches on the Gold coast because “..we’re told they’re closed but you can exercise. Does that mean you can swim.”

Ok Ally, the Mayor made the decision to close the beaches, the three beaches on the Gold Coast. He spoke to me about it and I backed him in his decision, uhm, they’ve also closed the car parks. What he is saying is if you are local, you are allowed to go for a walk, but if you are not local you should not be coming down to the beach to do your exercise. You should be doing your exercise in your local area.

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Karl – Such a weird message.

Such a clear message and …

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Karl – So if someone is not a local and they’re in the area anyway… they can’t even go to the beach but a local can. What’s the point of it?

Why should they be in the area Karl, why should they be in the area. If you’re not local, why should you be in the area?

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Karl – maybe they were there before the lock down.

You can’t be on holiday. There’s no holidays.

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Karl – What if you’re across the road, what if you’re five kms away can you go for a walk on that same beach, what if you’re six and not exactly in that area. This is where it falls down.

Well if you’re a local you should be able to go, there is nothing wrong with that. If you’re in the Gold Coast area you should be able to go for a walk around your local area. I don’t think we can get caught up in technicalities here. What we need to say very clearly is that now is not the time for a holiday. If you live locally, go and walk locally. If you don’t live locally, stay in your suburb and celebrate family… celebrate Easter with your family.

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Ally – So that is a no to swimming in the ocean even if you’re a local? Right?

Look no, my understanding is that if you are a local that you’re allowed to go for a swim and come out. But you would have to talk to the Mayor about that, he’s made the rules about the beaches on the Gold Coast.

QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk

Karl – I’d be interested to see what the definition of a local is.

The worst part about this interview is that the QLD Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk shows no concern that the laws are not clear, does not understand herself the basics of the laws that she is promoting and is giving incorrect and misleading information.

Scenarios that she clearly cannot fathom include

  • People from other areas, states or countries that are in that area at a hotel or family members residence. According to the Premier these people cannot go to the beach at all.
  • More to come soon.

The Public Health Direction states clearly that one of the permissible reasons you may leave the house is to exercise (see the full directive at the end of this article).

Home Confinement requirements in Queensland
6. A person who resides in Queensland must not leave their principal place of residence except for, and only to the extent reasonably necessary to accomplish, the following permitted purposes:
c. to engage in physical exercise;

There is no definition of area nor local, it does not say you cannot drive to the area, or walk, or catch a bus or anything else. It says that you can leave your residence to engage in physical exercise.

Anyone who is issued a Penalty Infringement Notice under these circumstance should consider appealing the decision by following the instructions on the rear, if that appeal fails, all you have done is given yourself more time to pay if you don’t want to appeal this in court.

Home Confinement, Movement and Gathering Direction

Summary

Effective from: 11.59pm on 2 April 2020

Posted: 2 April 2020

Direction from Chief Health Officer in accordance with emergency powers arising from the declared public health emergency

Public Health Act 2005 (Qld)

Section 362B

On 29 January 2020, under the Public Health Act 2005, the Minister for Health and Minister for Ambulance Services made an order declaring a public health emergency in relation to coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The public health emergency area specified in the order is for ‘all of Queensland’. Its duration has been extended by regulation to 19 May 2020 and may be further extended.

Further to this declaration, l, Dr Jeannette Young, Chief Health Officer, reasonably believe it is necessary to give the following directions pursuant to the powers under s 362B of the Public Health Act 2005 to assist in containing, or to respond to, the spread of COVID-19 within the community.

Preamble

  1. This Public Health Direction replaces the following Public Health Directions:
    1. the Home Confinement Direction given on 29 March 2020;
    2. the Mass Gatherings Direction (No 2) given on 21 March 2020;
    3. the Restrictions in Private Residences Direction given on 27 March 2020.
  2. This Public Health Direction is to be read in conjunction with other Public Health Directions issued under section 362B of the Public Health Act 2005 that have not expired or been revoked.

Citation

  1. This Public Health Direction may be referred to as the Home Confinement, Movement and Gathering Direction.

Revocation

  1. The following Public Health Directions are revoked effective from 11:59 pm on 2 April 2020:
    1. the Home Confinement Direction given on 29 March 2020;
    2. the Mass Gatherings Direction (No 2) given on 21 March 2020;
    3. the Restrictions in Private Residences Direction given on 27 March 2020.

PART 1 — DIRECTION – HOME CONFINEMENT, MOVEMENT AND GATHERING

  1. This direction applies from 11:59 pm on 2 April 2020 until the end of the declared public health emergency, unless it is revoked or replaced.

Home Confinement requirements in Queensland

  1. A person who resides in Queensland must not leave their principal place of residence except for, and only to the extent reasonably necessary to accomplish, the following permitted purposes:
    1. to obtain food or other essential goods or services;
    2. to obtain medical treatment or other health care services;
    3. to engage in physical exercise;
    4. to perform work or volunteering, or carry out or conduct an essential business, activity or undertaking, and the work, business activity or undertaking to be performed is of a nature that cannot reasonably be performed from the person’s principal place of residence;
    5. to visit another person’s residence in accordance with paragraph 9;
    6. education and early childhood workers may travel to and from their home centre over the term 1 break;
    7. to visit a terminally ill relative or to attend a funeral or wedding, subject to any applicable restrictions under other relevant Public Health Directions;
    8. to provide assistance, care or support to an immediate family member;
    9. to attend any court or tribunal of Australia or to comply with or give effect to orders of the court or tribunal of Australia;
    10. to attend a childcare facility, school, university, or other educational institution, to the extent care or instruction cannot reasonably be obtained in the person’s principal place of residence;
    11. to assist with or participate in an investigation or other action by a law enforcement authority, whether voluntarily or not;
    12. for children under 18 years who do not live in the same household as their biological parents or siblings or one of their parents or siblings, continuing existing arrangements for access to, and contact between, parents and children and siblings, but not allowing access or contact with vulnerable groups or persons;Example of a vulnerable group or person – a person over 70 years or a person with a medical condition that makes them vulnerable to COVID-19
    13. avoiding injury or illness or to escape a risk of harm;Example – escaping a risk of harm related to domestic and family violence
    14. to comply with or give effect to the exercise of a power or function of a government agency or entity under a law.

Outdoor gatherings of up to 2 persons or with members of household

  1. Subject to paragraph 8, a person who leaves their principal place of residence for a permitted purpose under paragraph 6 may be accompanied by members of their household or, alternatively, by no more than one person who is not a member of their household.
  2. If a person requires physical assistance to leave their principal place of residence or it is reasonably necessary for the safety of the person or the public, and there is no other reasonable way for a purpose under paragraph 6 to be achieved, a person may be accompanied by more than one person who is not a member of their household and who is a carer or support worker for that person.Example – a person with a disability may be accompanied by more than one carer or support worker.

Receiving up to 2 visitors at a residence

  1. Subject to paragraphs 10 to 12, a person who is an owner, resident, tenant, occupier, temporary occupier or person in control of a residence may allow up to two visitors who are not ordinarily members of the person’s household.Examples of visitors – Family members and close friends
  2. Paragraph 9 does not prevent workers or volunteers entering a place of residence and they are not counted as visitors for the purpose of paragraph 9.
  3. Paragraph 9 does not apply to a residential aged care facility, corrective services facility or detention centre.Note – The Aged Care Direction given on 21 March 2020 and the Corrective Services Facility Direction given on 22 March 2020 restrict visitors to those facilities. Other Public Health Directions may be made applying to other types of facilities.
  4. Paragraph 9 does not apply to a residence of a person with disability if it is necessary for more than two people to attend the residence to provide services to the person with disability to meet their support needs.
  5. An owner, resident, tenant, occupier, temporary occupier or person in control of premises, including a residence, must take reasonable steps to encourage occupants of, and visitors to, the premises to practise social distancing to the extent reasonably practicable.

Gatherings in non-residences

  1. A person who owns, controls or operates premises, other than a residence, must not organise or allow a gathering to occur on the premises.

Exemptions

  1. The Queensland Chief Health Officer may grant an exemption to part or all of these directions on compassionate grounds or for other exceptional circumstances.

Definitions

  1. Corrective services facility has the same meaning as in the Corrective Services Act 2006.
  2. Detention centre has the same meaning as in the Youth Justice Act 1992.
  3. Essential business, activity or undertaking means a business, activity or undertaking that is not prohibited by the Non-essential business, activity and undertaking Closure Direction (No.4), or its successor, or another Public Health Direction.
  4. Essential goods or services are food and other supplies, and services, that are needed for the necessities of life and operation of society, such as food, fuel, medical supplies, and other goods.
  5. Household means persons who ordinarily live at the same residence, including if family or kinship customs or cultural obligations have the effect of a person living across multiple residences.
  6. Indoor space means an area, room or premises that is or are substantially enclosed by a roof and walls, regardless of whether the roof or walls or any part of them are:
    1. permanent or temporary; or
    2. open or closed.
  7. Gathering, subject to paragraph 23, means:
    1. a gathering of more than two persons in a single undivided outdoor space at the same time; or
    2. a gathering of more than two persons or more in a single undivided indoor space at the same time.
  8. Gathering does not include a gathering:
    1. at an airport that is necessary for the normal business of the airport;
    2. for the purposes of or related to public transportation, including in vehicles or at public transportation facilities such as stations, platforms and stops;
    3. at a medical or health service facility that is necessary for the normal business of the facilities;
    4. for the purposes of emergency services;
    5. at a residential aged care facility or residence of a person with a disability, that is necessary for the normal business of the facility or residence;
    6. at a prison, correctional facility, youth justice centre or other place of custody;
    7. at a court or tribunal;
    8. at Parliament for the purpose of its normal operations;
    9. at a food market, supermarket, grocery store, retail store or shopping centre that is necessary for the normal business of those premises;
    10. at a workplace, including but not limited to an office building, factory, manufacturing facility, resource extraction, mine or mineral processing facility, utilities or construction sites that is necessary for the normal operation of those premises;
    11. at a school, university, educational institution or childcare facility that is necessary for the normal business of the facility;
    12. at a hotel, motel or accommodation facility, such as a worker camp, that is necessary for the normal operation of accommodation services;
    13. at a wedding or funeral permitted under the Non-essential business, activity and undertaking Closure Direction (No. 4), or its successor, or another Public Health Direction;
    14. at an outdoor place where persons may be present for the purposes of transiting through the place;Example – Queen Street Mall
    15. at an indoor place where persons may be present for the purposes of transiting through the place;Example – Central Station
    16. specified as exempt from this direction by the Chief Health Officer in writing.
  9. Outdoor space means a space that is not an indoor space;
  10. Premises has the same meaning as in Schedule 2 of the Public Health Act 2005, and also includes land and vessels.
  11. Principal place of residence means:
    1. for a person who permanently resides in Queensland, the residence where the person ordinarily resides.
    2. for a person who temporarily resides in Queensland, the residence where the person ordinarily resides when the person in present in Queensland.
  12. Residence means premises used, or intended to be used, as a dwelling or mainly as a dwelling, and includes the land on which the residence is situated, and includes:
    1. a single detached dwelling;
    2. each of one or more attached dwellings that are separated by a common wall;
      Examples for paragraph (b) — villa unit, townhouse, terrace house, row house, unit in an apartment block.
    3. a manufactured home as defined in section 10 of the Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Act 2003;
    4. a caravan as defined in section 7 of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008;
    5. any other building or structure situated on the same land as the premises or dwelling.
      Examples for paragraph (e) – shed, pool house, carport, granny flat. But does not include a corrective services facility or detention centre.
  13. Residence does not include a residential aged care facility, corrective services facility or detention centre.
  14. Residential aged care facility means a facility at which accommodation, and personal care or nursing care or both, are provided to a person in respect of whom a residential care subsidy or a flexible care subsidy is payable under the Aged Care Act 1997 of the Commonwealth.
  15. Resident has the meaning given in section 14 of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008.
  16. Social distancing includes remaining at least 1.5 metres away from other persons, regular washing of hands and avoiding handshaking.
  17. Tenant has the meaning given in section 13 of the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008.

PART 2 – PENALTIES

A person to whom the direction applies commits an offence if the person fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with the direction.

Section 362D of the Public Health Act 2005 provides:

Failure to comply with public health directions

  • A person to whom a public health direction applies must comply with the direction unless the person has a reasonable excuse.
  • Maximum penalty—100 penalty units.

Dr Jeannette Young
Chief Health Officer
2 April 2020

Published on the Queensland Health website at 2 April 2020, 11.35pm

Queensland’s Container Refund Scheme is a Scam, Rip-Off and a Rort!

More reports continue to come in of people being ripped off by the Container Refund Scheme and the amount of time wasted on trying to get refunds yet the Queensland Government remains silent as it handed off it’s responsibilities to a third party called Containers for Change.

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

The terms and conditions state that there can be no disputes once you drop off your containers for a refund. Furthermore Containers for Change offer the simple if ridiculous advice to go elsewhere if you’re not happy! Sure let’s waste more fuel and time for a pointless scheme that doesn’t achieve anything that it claims and to top it off they blame customers for being stupid and not knowing what containers can be recycled!

… some people still aren’t sure which containers are eligible and which are ineligible, she said.

If people aren’t happy with the container refund point they have used, they should check what other operators are in their area.

Container for Change

The sooner the state government does what it should have done in the first place the better.

‘Cash for cans’ faces teething problems

DESPITE having 12 months to watch how the cash for cans scheme works in the Tweed, organisers of the Gold Coast’s own version are still facing some serious teething problems.

The Queensland scheme, which incorporates recycling machines and bulk deposits, has been labelled a “rort” and a “rip-off’ by locals who have been short-changed.

The Gold Coast Sun has received multiple complaints from locals who say they have dropped off significant amounts of cans and bottles only to receive meagre amounts of money, and in some cases no money at all.

The Containers for Change scheme offers a 10-cent refund for each eligible container returned for recycling at one of the container refund points, but some locals call it a scam.

Roz Rowe, 50, from Coomera Waters deposited her recyclables at the Salvos store at Oxenford, where it was calculated she would receive a refund of $25.80.

However, she received a total sum of only $3.70 – 36 days after her deposit.

“I was assured payment it would take three to four days,” she said.

“This is a ridiculous amount of time for me to wait for money due.”

Ms Rowe then took $40 worth to the Envirobank on Siganto Drive at Helensvale, but they had run out of orange collection bags.

She then drove to Ashmore, but said the queue was “out the door”.

“By this stage, I had two agitated kids who did not want to wait the hour queue time so we came home. Petrol wasted, time wasted for nothing,” Ms Rowe said.

In a written complaint to Containers for Change, Ms Rowe said the issue was eventually resolved.

Kerry Charlwood from Oxenford complained after she dropped off nine large bags and received only $2.10.

“I put trust in this process,” she said. “My grandchildren have been working hard collecting these bottles and cans.

“I’m not the only person missing money too. The more people who complain, hopefully someone will do something about it.”

There have also been calls to expand the Ashmore depo, with some locals calling it “overloaded” and based on an “honour system”.

Ashmore local Anthony Nicholas wrote on the Containers for Change Facebook page, questioning the validity of the refund process and suggesting there was no way to accurately calculate the appropriate refund.

A Containers for Change spokeswoman said they would be “very concerned” to hear people were not getting correct refunds.

“If anyone believes this is the case they should contact our call centre on 134 242 and provide their scheme ID so we can track what has happened to the containers … some people still aren’t sure which containers are eligible and which are ineligible,” she said.

“If people aren’t happy with the container refund point they have used, they should check what other operators are in their area.”

2nd of February 2019 | Tweed Daily News

Envirobank Container Refund Locations require Special Bags, Envirobank runs out of Special Bags!

On top of the Envirobank 50 item per bag policy which if you disregard and put in 49 or 51 items will see your whole bag forfeited and beside the fact that you cannot physically put in 50 1.25l bottles now Envirobank has run out of bags and faced long delays in obtaining more.

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

Another 250,000 bags have arrived taking the total number of bags in circulation in Queensland to over 600,000 and more are on the way! And to further increase the costs of recycling you can now only have 3 bags at a time so $15 is the maximum that you can earn in a single trip to an Envirobank run facility no matter how far you travel. Using the ATOs 66c per km rate this means once you exceed a 22km round trip you are losing money not taking into account time and other costs.

Container refund locations source of frustrations

COMPLAINTS have continued to swamp the Envirobank recycling centres as people vent their frustrations over a lack of bags, padlocks on machines and strict refunding rules.

The Queensland Government introduced the container refund scheme on November 1 last year which provides a 10 cent refund payment for select bottles and cans.

Envirobank has more than 30 recycling sites around southeast Queensland.

A common complaint has been about the difficulty getting the required bags to use the recycling machines, despite businesses near each deposit location stocking bags.

Residents have taken to Facebook to air their gripes, with some claiming their local location has been out of bags up to six times when they’ve tried to recycle or the deposit box was locked.

“Bags would be a bonus and unlocking the container at Peregian Springs,” wrote Gail Gear.

“(It) wasn’t unlocked yesterday despite all your advertising saying it would be closed New Year’s Day not New Year’s Eve.”

The company also recently announced, to mixed reactions, that users have to have 50 items in each bag.

“The service is not focused on penalising people for miscounting their bags and while the scheme is still new we will of course exercise leniency when initially presented with ineligible items,” a Envirobank spokesperson wrote on its Facebook.

Envirobank were approached for comment, but failed to respond.

4th of January 2019 | Sunshine Coast Daily

The confusing part of Envirobank’s statement is that they claim that many of the existing 350,000 bags have been taken for other purposes but they claim that there are now 600,000 bags available with the 250,000 that just arrived!

A letter from the Managing Director

Brace yourselves for some really good news! The bags are back. Another 250,000 have landed and are moving into Envirobank’s depots, pods and stockist locations as we speak.

This means we now have 600,000 orange collection bags available to Crunch members across the state. 600,000 of these reusable bags can recycle 30 million containers in a single rotation! And we have even more arriving in the next few months.

Now, we know the bag shortage was a disaster for you – trust us – it was a Disaster (with a capital “D”) for us! Our bags went walkabout at record speed and never found their way home again. They took holidays at the beach – disguised as picnic rugs, they went fishing, snorkelling, camping – you name it. But the bags missed us and we missed them.

21st of February 2019 | Envirobank

Where can I get orange collection bags?

Envirobank’s orange collection bags are available free (in limited quantities) at a number of locations:

Over-the-counter at Bag Stockists
Many of our Drop’n’Go sites now have a nearby bag stockist, this should be your first port-of-call when looking for orange bags. These retailers have been generous enough to offer this service to support their local community to please don’t forget to show them your appreciation!
(*Please note: bag stockists enforce limits of 3 bags per person, per day, to ensure others don’t miss out)

List of pod sites and nearby bag stockists:

POD NAME: Aussie World
BAG STOCKIST: Celebrations Bottle Shop

POD NAME: Aspley Hypermarket
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Brookside Shopping Centre
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Cannon Hill Kmart Plaza
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Chancellor’s Tavern
BAG STOCKIST: Inside tavern

POD NAME: The Creek Tavern
BAG STOCKIST: Bottle ‘O’ Shop

POD NAME: Currumbin State School
BAG STOCKIST: Gecko Environment Council reception

POD NAME: Duporth Tavern
BAG STOCKIST: Inside Tavern

POD NAME: Glasshouse Mountains Tavern
BAG STOCKIST: Thirsty Camel bottle shop

POD NAME: Jindalee Home
BAG STOCKIST: Coles at Jindalee Home Centre

POD NAME: Kirra Beach Hotel
BAG STOCKIST: Liquor Legend

POD NAME: Macgregor Home
BAG STOCKIST: Corrine McMillan MP Office (Mansfield Electorate)

POD NAME: Coles Mt Gravatt Plaza
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Coles Nambour
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Narangba Valley Tavern
BAG STOCKIST: Shane King MP Office (Kurwongbah electorate) Shop 4, 232 Young Rd, Narangba

POD NAME: Pete’s Village Bakery
BAG STOCKIST: Pete’s Village Bakery

POD NAME: Coles Pacific Pines
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Coles Peninsula Fair
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Coles Peregian Springs
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Raceview Hotel
BAG STOCKIST: Star Liquor Raceview

POD NAME: Redbank Plaza
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

POD NAME: Runcorn Tavern
BAG STOCKIST: Duncan Pegg MP Office, 5/62 Pinelands Road, Sunnybank Hills

POD NAME: Waves of Kindness
BAG STOCKIST: Sandy Bolton MP Office (Noosa Electorate)

POD NAME: Coles Wynnum West Plaza
BAG STOCKIST: Coles Service Desk

No stockists in your area yet? We’re working on it! And as more stockists come come online, we’ll add them to this list and in the location details for each specific Drop’n’Go site on our “Where to recycle” map.

Envirobank depots in NSW and QLD
There may be a stack where you can help yourself to a limited quantity of orange bags, or simply ask one of our friendly team members and they’ll give you some.

Envirobank Drop’n’Go pods
On either side of the pod, between the chutes, you will see a hole marked “Replacement Bags”. These bags are topped up every day, however, sadly they seem to jump out of the holes all at once, leaving none for other recyclers. Try as we might, there isn’t a lot we can do to stop this! So get in quick after we’ve topped up each day, otherwise head to a depot or bag stockist.

Envirobank Drop’n’Go

Recycling Plastic Containers and Lids, why is Australia so far behind the rest of the World?

The different Container Recycling schemes running across Australia has shown once again that not having a single federal entity responsible creates a bureaucratic mess with massive duplication in costs for all involved and a minefield with different rules for each state creating confusion about what can and cannot be recycled.

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

Not a single state has chosen the Reverse Vending Machine model at the point of sale like successful implementations in places like Germany and instead the requirement is for millions of trips to be made to dedicated recycling sites which does nothing but harm the environment.

The next issue is that most states don’t recycle the plastic lids and require you to remove them before you return them and throw them into bins that are destined for landfill. This is contrary to the practices of other countries that have invested in recycling facilities and shows that once again our recycling in Australia in a joke. Organisations like Envirobank further confuse the issue with their ideas on how container lids should be handled and recommend that you put them into your recycle bin or use them for other purposes!

Did you know that the plastic in the lids are different to the plastic in bottles? This means they need to be recycled differently. Not only that, but if recycling batches are contaminated with lids it can mean the whole lot might get sent into landfill (Noooo!).

When lids enter a recycling facility’s sorting process, they often get lost along the way because of their small size and weight, and are then sent on to landfills. What a waste – right!

When lids are included in the recycling at our drop points it can wreak havoc on our machinery – causing technical issues, risking personal injury, and delaying your Crunch Credits being issued! So always make sure to remove the lids before dropping them in.

Loose lids on their own can be too small to be picked up by depot sorting machines which means they often get sorted out and end up in landfill.

Place your loose lids into a larger plastic bottle, like a milk bottle, before adding them to your yellow council bin for recycling so they are contained and make their way through the recycling machines.

Look for alternative ways to reuse them. For example, ask if your local schools and pre-schools would like to take some for their craft-hour.

23rd of June 2019 | Envirobank

The truth is that the lids don’t need to be removed as they can be recycled at the same time as the bottles and automatically separated during the washing process. If the lid is removed before this occurs it will likely end up in landfill. Some Australian States and organisations will tell you to remove the lid and put it into a recycling bin but this will see it likely end up in landfill due to it’s size.

In fact by being told that we can recycle without the lids this has created an issue with bottle lids now being in the top 5 items being found in beach cleaning and litter monitoring around the world. The top 5 in order of number are

  1. Fishing Gear
  2. Plastic Bags and Utensils
  3. Balloons
  4. Cigarette Butts
  5. Bottle Caps

In the summer of 2016, The North Sea Foundation and more than 2,000 volunteers picked up as many bottle caps as they could find along the entire Dutch North Sea coast. These bottle caps were analysed one by one. The survey shows the quantity, type and origins of the bottle caps that pollute the North Sea and its beaches.

The biggest issue in Australia is that we generally just send our recycling to other countries for them to deal with and each council area differs in their approach, some even send recycling to landfill directly as we have seen many times recently.

The following is from The Association of Plastic Recyclers who have an excellent FAQ that illustrates how far behind we are in Australia.

Caps On – Frequently Asked Questions

I’ve always heard that plastic recyclers needed caps to be taken off? Why make the change?
Two key reasons: First, when recycling gets easier, participation goes up. APR is dedicated to boosting participation in recycling programs. Second, the cap material is recyclable. Why dispose something that could be recycled? In the past the plastics recycling industry was not able to effectively recycle bottles with caps on so the message to remove the cap was created. Recycling collection and processing technology has improved, demand for the recyclable material has increased allowing the current caps on recycling message and process.

Are recycled caps marketable?
Yes. Generally, caps are made out of high density polyethylene (HDPE) and polypropylene (PP) – both of these have high demand from applications in both domestic and export markets.

Caps are usually made of a different type of plastic than bottles. Do they have to be recycled separately?
No. Although closures may be made of a different material than the bottle, bottles are ground into flake before being vigorously washed in the recycling process. The washed cap material is then separated from the bottle material during a water bath float/sink process. PET will sink, PP and HDPE will float. Both materials are then recycled into new items.

Should bottles and containers be flattened before replacing the cap?
APR’s primary message is EMPTY AND REPLACE CAP. According to a recent MRF Material Flow Study, flattening bottles can lead to improper sortation, and they may end up in the paper stream. Retaining a 3D form can help containers be successfully sorted.

Can bales of bottles with caps on be marketed at the same rate as bales without caps?
Yes. APR’s model bale specifications do not downgrade for the inclusion of caps. APR member companies regularly buy and recycle bales of caps-on bottles and containers.

Can I get a good bale compaction rate with caps on bottles?
Yes. Good bale density is important – too light and it’s hard to hit load requirements. Too tight and the material is over compacted, and recyclers cannot break them apart very well. While the answer varies by the type of baler, generally speaking 100-120psi of pressure should allow most balers to compress plastic bottles with caps on. Large-scale 2 ram systems, most commonly used in MRFs, should have no trouble as they often range in the 150-300+ psi range. A single ram, closed door baler usually operates at 70-120 psi. While larger balers of this format should be fine, those running at the low end of that range will generally have trouble securing a good bale. A single ram extrusion auto tie also needs to operate more at 100-120psi range but there’s some finesse needed. By running a load of cardboard before the bottles, the operator then gains something hard to push against and should be able to reach compaction.

Must the bottles go through a perforator machine before baling in order to get a good compaction rate?
Generally, no. Most current Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) do not operate a perforation machine to puncture the bottles before baling. Heavy duty horizontal balers take care of the job using plenty of pressure.

Will the caps shoot off during baling?
APR strongly suggests all baler safety equipment such as guards be left untampered, unmodified, and unchanged to prevent incidents and accidents. Rupturing bottles in a baler can create projectiles and baler manufacturers have included the guards for worker protection.

Are there things I can do to design my products to make them more recyclable?
Yes. The APR Design® Guide for Plastics Recyclability is the most comprehensive design resource outlining the plastics recycling industry’s recommendations in the marketplace today with the ultimate goal of all plastic packaging to be compatible with the plastics recycling infrastructure. Size and shape are critical parameters in MRF sorting, and this must be considered in designing packages for recycling. Items smaller than three inches in all dimensions are non-recyclable per APR. Most caps are smaller than three inches. If they are not replaced on bottles, they will not be recycled, and end up in the landfill.

Are metal caps really a problem?
Yes. Steel caps may damage machinery and aluminum caps may slow down production. They may cause contamination issues in the float/sink process, as they sink with PET material. Metal caps may also cause plastic bottles and containers to be separated from the plastics stream in the eddy current (magnetic) step of the sortation process at the MRF.

My MRF says that they do not accept caps on plastic containers. What should I do?
Please let them know that APR supports caps and closures to remain on containers before being placed in a recycling cart or bin. We understand that for some MRF’s accepting caps on is readily done and for some it is a challenge. Our message is that the market accepts bales for which the caps and closures are left on the bottles, but the equipment and policies at the local level may take time to adapt. Please feel free to share this information or direct your MRF officials to: www.plasticsrecycling.org.

The Queensland Container Refund Scheme continues to Worsen and what is the Cost to the Environment?

The Container Refund Schemes (called a different name in every state of course) in Australia are so utterly absurd. I’ve written about the Queensland system and shown that a Reverse Vending Machine (RVM) would have been a fraction of the price and meant that people can return their empty containers when they do their shopping.

This article is a supporting article for the main article | Queensland Container Refund Scheme.

We already knew from South Australian experience that depots experiences long queues of cars lined up idling for long periods of time and your average car can hold maybe 200 to 500 containers depending on how many bottles you have and this gives you $20 to $50 but factor in your costs of getting to the deport in time and wear and tear and how much are you really getting back and what cost to the environment are all these trips?

Reed Recycling in Townsville

What a great way to spend the weekend, sitting in your car and sucking on the fumes of the car in front whilst waiting to get a return on a deposit that may end up costing you money to get back.

Reed Recycling in Townsville

And when you do get to the front of the line you get to unload your car, and if you left the bottle caps on to stop them leaking you have to remove them before you hand them over for counting. And don’t crush or otherwise damage the containers or they won’t be accepted if they can’t see the barcode area.

Reed Recycling in Townsville

Job creation in Queensland at work. Instead of using machines that can process these at the point of sale and take care of all the work we get humans to double, triple and quadruple handle the containers.

Container drop off in Bowen

Drop your containers off at some locations but of course they are often full so some people put their labels on your bags! And don’t forget that some companies will keep all your containers if you don’t have the exact number that they specify in the bag. Why would you want to return your containers when you go shopping, it’s much more interesting going on a road trip and burning your fuel.

Staff and contractors have been ripped off by a Charters Towers depot that has since done a runner. Payments being delayed for six or more weeks are still common.

COEX spokesperson Adam Nicholson would not discuss specifics while investigations were ongoing, but said their priority was ensuring customers were not left out of pocket.

“We have seen a massive response, far more than we or anyone else predicted,” he said.

“I think we are experiencing twice the number or volume of containers as seen in New South Wales, so we’ve really load-tested our scheme since day one.

“The positive is that we know where our areas for improvement, are and we’re working really hard behind the scenes.”

COEX spokesperson Adam Nicholson

So Queensland has experienced twice the number or volume of containers as seen in New South Wales? That doesn’t sound correct but surely COEX wouldn’t mislead us?

Between the 1st of November 2018 and I assume the 21st of January 2019 (going by the date on the article) COEX has processed 150 million containers. That is roughly 11 weeks so 13.6 million containers per week.

The NSW system handled 1.3 billion over 14 months so 61 weeks which is 21 million containers a week.

So COEX has been caught misleading the public with false statistics, if I can look them up surely COEX can. Is it asking too much for Government sponsored organisations to actually know the industry they are working in?

Container deposit scheme demand creates mountain of cans at recycling depot

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

Queenslands “Smart” Drivers Licence and how our Government screwed us with a Billion dollar failure

The story of the drivers licence replacement project that was slated to be a zero cost upgrade but will eventually cost Queensland taxpayers and drivers $1,000,000,000 between 2025 and 2030 started in 2001, announced in 2003 and progressively the costs kept adding and the deployment keep getting pushed out until 2011 when it was finally available with none of the functionality or features promised. How did we end up with the same for such a high cost? Government incompetence.

2003

Queensland driving towards a secure Smart State licence

29th of September 2003 | Media Statements

The first announcement of a new drivers licence requirement is made by Premier Peter Beattie and the Transport Minister Steve Bredhauer.

Apparently according to the Premier Peter Beattie this licence would make the “Smart State” an international leader and keep us all safe from fraud. Meanwhile Estonia became the international leader in smart card licences, didn’t feel the need to announce it and our state government committed fraud to the tune of $1,000,000,000 by extorting their taxpayers excessively for the new smart dumb licence.

The proposed new licence would make the Smart State an international leader in secure smart card licences, and give us an edge in the fight against fraud.

The new licence would have a built-in computer chip to securely store and process information that could be accessed only by a special reader.

“It would securely store personal details, plus a photo and signature, and would have the capacity to store emergency contact information.

Premier Peter Beattie | 29th of September 2003

One of the claims was that this would cost around $60 million if we replaced existing systems in the Transport Department offices however if they enter into a public private partnership the system may cost us the same as the current system.

Depending on the private sector’s interest in a public private partnership, the new system may involve no cost to Queensland taxpayers.

Transport Minister Steve Bredhauer | 30th of September 2003

The new cards would offer us the follow advantages

  • Reduce identity fraud
  • Allow you to keep emergency contact details on the card (all police cars would be fitted out with readers)
  • Remove the need for address on the licence (all businesses that need the address would have to have card readers to read the address for example at the time video stores, car rentals etc)
  • Allow business to be transacted online with the Transport Department
  • Public transport payment card
  • Used for vending machine and small transactions in stores

Any attempt to crack the ‘keys’ of this type of smart card technology would be extremely expensive. A would-be hacker would need to invest in several millions of dollars in technology just to crack one card, and this could not be achieved without destruction of the particular card itself.

Queensland Government | 29th of September 2003 | Security Safeguards attachment to press release

In the consultation paper that was released in 2003 and which is no longer available online the following features were promoted.

Licence holders would be able to check their own licensing information stored on the smartcard using a self serve terminal or if they have a reader attached to their home computer.

If licensing information such as address and expiry date were to be stored on the chip, in the future, licence holders would be able to give permission (for example, by using their own PIN {Personal Identification Number}) for other organisations such as car hire companies to access it.

Queensland Police Service could use readers containing special access software to access driver licensing and emergency contact information.

Queensland Government Consultation Paper for Smart Licence | 2003

The quotes from the consultation paper are available on the submission made by the EFA in response to the Queensland Smart Card Driver Licence Proposal. I’m not going to duplicate they work that they have done as their submission covers the reasons why the smart card on the new licence is not secure and what the Queensland Government promised was never going to be delivered.

There was no requirement for a smart card to be used, all they needed was a more secure way of creating the cards instead of using laminated cards that were being stolen from Transport Department offices by thieves jumping the counter, taking a whole tray of cards and laminate and walking out. Of course we could have secured the card making equipment but this would have been too logical. These devices were available in 2003 and are much more common now, a small printer creates the cards and prints them on the spot but I digress as this is the story of the billion dollar smart card that has no smarts!

2004

Market Sounding for New Drivers Licence

20th of May 2004 | Media Statements

The Minister for Transport & Main Roads, The Honourable Paul Lucas is sounding out the market for new ways to make money with the new drivers licence and announced three weeks submission period from businesses wanting to use outdated technology.

The new licence could offer a range of potential features, including storing emergency contact details on an electronic chip on the licence, or using the chip to let licence holders carry out secure online transactions with government agencies.

The chip may also let licence holders receive credit card-linked loyalty or reward points for buying low-cost goods and services. These may include buying public transport or parking tickets, or goods from vending machines by using money stored on the smartcard.

But these are ideas only – this market sounding is all about hearing from the private sector what it thinks are potential commercial applications for the proposed licence.

Mr Lucas said the new smartcard licence provided a chance for the Smart State to be a leader in using innovative technology for a new generation of driver licensing.

I expect many Queenslanders will find the use of optional extras such as credit cards and cash cards to the smartcard licence very convenient, but that will be entirely a matter for them, no ifs and no buts

The market sounding will help Queensland Transport prepare the final business case by identifying private sector interest in providing commercial services on the driver licence proposal.

An initial market sounding study, conducted in 2001 prior to this licence proposal, found it was both a feasible and manageable project.

This second round will confirm the feasibility of our approach to this project’s development, as well as its overall viability.

Minister for Transport & Main Roads, The Honourable Paul Lucas | 20th of May 2004

2005

A change in direction

The Smart Cards will no longer be able to used for shopping and vending machines! But Premier Peter Beattie sold this as one of the major features.

Smartcard licences to be issued to Queensland drivers will not be multifunction transaction cards. The card would be confined to its main purpose of licensing drivers.

Transport Minister Paul Lucas | January 2005

Smart Licence on the Cards

29th of December 2005 | Media Statement

The way driver’s licences are currently made and the way information is stored needs to be brought into the new digital age.

Queensland is the Smart State, and we will have a smarter licensing product in place in 2008.

Licence holders will be able to opt to have some of their personal information, such as their address, moved from the display panel and put instead on the microchip, which the old cards don’t allow.

Owners of the new licence will set a four-digit Personal Identification Number (PIN) to the card to help protect their privacy.

Premier & Treasurer, The Honourable Peter Beattie | 29th of December 2005

Clearly not that smart Peter given that it was 2011 before the cards were being rolled out at a cost many times higher that delivers none of the benefits you promised.

2006

The next announcement from the Queensland Government came on the 10th of August 2006 and they had dropped the idea to continue to produce the cards themselves and have gone straight to letting the private sector develop a solution that no doubt will cost us a fortune.

It’s a quantum leap in the security and integrity of licence information

They’ll be publicly released next week. The tender will invite expressions of interest from the private sector for planning, design, integration, financing, delivery, management and maintenance of the drivers licence.

The proposal will be developed under Public Private Partnerships guidelines in accordance with State Government policies.

Transport and Main Roads Minister Paul Lucas | 10th of August 2006

2007

2008

The Shortlist

18th of January 2008 | Media Statement

Four years after being announced the Queensland Government finally announced on the 18th of January 2007 a shortlist of consortia. The companies involved would develop proposals for selection later in 2007 with a pilot deployment in 2008 and a full deployment in 2009.
(this was delayed by another two years before this occurred)

The new licence will feature an embedded microchip, and this new technology will feature advanced cryptography, making the licence extremely difficult to inappropriately access or alter.

This is about getting the right people to develop the most secure licence in Australia, and achieving value for money

Minister for Transport and Main Roads Paul Lucas | 18th of January 2007
  • EDS, consisting of Placard, Viisage, Sagem Australasia, Grabba International, ActivIdentity Australia and Sun Microsystems Australia;
  • Fujitsu Australia, consisting of Giesecke and Devrient Australasia;
  • Australia Post, consisting of Datacard South Pacific, Oberthur Card Systems Australia, Ingenico International (Pacific) and ActivIdentity Australia; and
  • Leigh Mardon, consisting of LM Gemplus, Gemalto, Grabba International and Hewlett Packard Australia.

QLD smart licence to go national

13th of June 2008 | Computerworld

Expectations that Queensland’s emerging smart card driver licence will become a national model could see card readers in every Australian business, home, club and local video shop.

The licence, which uses facial recognition, has been under development by Queensland Transport for three years, and aims to reduce fraud, simplify card issuing and cut red tape.

Other states in Australia are developing similar smart-card licensing, though none are as advanced as the New Queensland Driver Licence (NQDL) project.

Queensland Transport land transport and safety executive director Judy Oswin said the card will be the first in Australia to include facial recognition and will remove address details from the face of the licence.

It is a huge change that people are going to have to get used to.

There is an awful amount of information that is relied upon on the face of the driver licence.

Queensland Transport land transport and safety executive director Judy Oswin

Registered clubs, car hire companies and other government agencies including Australia Post will have access to user data embedded in the licence and stored in government databases for validation of identity, address, and whether the person is allowed to drive.

Such validation will require users to swipe their licence in a smart card reader and enter a pin number to allow the organisation to obtain basic licence details and conditions.

Oswin said other ancillary uses, such as automatic transfer of vehicle registration, will be integrated into the chip as the project develops.

“We need to focus on delivering the project but we are open to incorporating [other uses],” she said.

It will be the first time that images and written signatures are stored in a central repository for the Queensland drivers licence.

The NQDL project is pioneering smart card technology in the country, and has written components of the 24727 ISO standard which is yet to be completed.

Austroads, the association of Australian and New Zealand road transport and traffic authorities, is expected to promote the same standards used by the NQDL to ensure interoperability between states.

Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) certificates used in the Queensland licence are expected to be adopted by all states.

Oswin said police will be able to use the same smart card readers to check licence conditions and confirm identity if uniformed PKI certificates are used.

Lax interoperability between state licencing will damage everything from fraud prevention, to law enforcement and future smart card initiatives.

Users will be able to update personal information over the Internet, and possibly in the future through a series of public smart card reader terminals.

Data on the smart card will be updated whenever it is placed in a reader, and users will be supplied with record of access.

The project began the “implementation phase” at the start of last year, and its expected to commence rolling out from late 2009.

New Drivers Licence a Step Closer

13th of November 2008 | Media Statement

The Transport Minister John Mickel on the claimed to have introduced legislation to Parliament for the new drivers licence.

We are getting on with the job and advancing our Towards Q2 strategy – the new licence will be smart and secure.

Fake driver licences can be used to commit a wide range of crimes, such as money laundering, creating false identities and identity theft

…motorist’s address will not be shown. Instead it will be stored electronically on the smart chip.

This new feature is aimed at personal safety and protection of property .

Think of it this way – does your ATM card show your address ? Your credit card ? Your Medicare card ?

No – none of these display your home address. From now on, if a person has lost or had their handbag or wallet stolen, the chance of the driver’s licence being used to break into their house is significantly decreased.

Transport Minister John Micke | 13th of November 2008

These are nothing but outright false statements, they knew about the issues of taking the address off the drivers licence but they continue to put this forward as one of the major selling points knowing that it would never occur and why compare a credit card or ATM card to a drivers licence, they are not even remotely the same and only an idiot would make these comparisions.

Next they listed three key features, none of which were implemented. This was under 2 years out from full deployment and and 5 years from when they were told that what they wanted to to do with the card was not possible.

  • Digital photographs will be able to be accessed by authorised officers for licensing transactions such as licence issue and renewal and licence-related enforcement. Police access to digital photographs outside of transport-related enforcement and licensing will require a judicial order.
  • Queensland Police and transport inspectors will have handheld smartcard readers to access the information stored on the chip.
  • A cardholder may also provide access to third parties by inserting the licence into a smartcard reader, and entering their PIN to authorise information to be read from the chip, such as their address.

2009

2009/2010 Licence Costs

  • Five years | $73.30

Unisys scores five-year QLD digital drivers’ licence deal

23rd of April 2009 | ITnews

Queensland Transport will progressively replace three million laminated drivers’ licences with smartcards that use facial recognition technology supplied by Unisys.

The Department said today it has awarded a five-year contract to Unisys Australia, which will act as prime contractor and primary implementation partner for facial image capture, facial image recognition, and case management aspects of the project.

The smartcard licences will be introduced in a rolling program as existing laminated licences expire and are renewed.

The process is expected to take approximately five years.

“We have used the laminated licence design in Queensland for over 20 years,” said Judy Oswin, Department of Land, Transport and Safety executive director.

“The new digital licence will deliver a more secure form of driver licence documentation for Queenslanders as it is harder to forge or alter.

“As a result it will help reduce the risk of identity theft to Queensland licence holders and give them greater confidence that their personal licence information is being kept secure.”

The Unisys solution includes approximately 370 purpose-built image capture devices to take biometric facial images that are subsequently embedded into the smartcard chip.

The front counter devices will be used at most Queensland Transport customer service centres, some Queensland Government Agent Program (QGAP) offices and police stations in rural and remote areas.

Unisys said it will train Queensland Transport staff in facial image capture operation to ensure high quality, secure and consistent image capture in line with ISO standards.

Unisys will also provide Cognitec facial image recognition software to match the biometric facial image against existing images in the driver licence database, “a critical component to identify if individuals hold multiple cards in different names, or attempt to obtain cards using forged or stolen identity documents.”

Unisys partner Daon will provide biometric enrolment technology and biometric middleware software.

Where a discrepancy needs further investigation, the Unisys identification and credentialing framework LEIDA (Library of eID Artefacts software) will act as a backbone case management system to connect all the elements of the Queensland Transport solution together.

For instance, where an applicant’s photo matches a photo under a different name in the system it will trigger an alert, provide an immediate side-by-side comparison, and track ongoing case management if further investigation is required.

Queensland Transport also announced that Leigh Mardon Australia would design the customer interface devices to provide for the capture of a cardholder’s signature image, PIN and other secure information.

QLD to get smart licences next year

23rd of April 2009 | Computerworld

Queensland Transport has inked a five-year deal with Unisys to design and build a facial recognition and biometric matching platform for the state’s smartcard drivers’ licence.

Unisys would not reveal the value of the deal.

Some three million laminated drivers’ licence will be gradually replaced from mid-next year with the smartcards, which will also provide access to multiple government services.

Registered clubs, car hire companies and other government agencies including Australia Post will have access to user data embedded in the licence and stored in government databases for validation of identity, address, and whether the person is allowed to drive. The cards will also provide for the automatic transfer of vehicle registration

Unisys will design some 370 image capture devices to be used in QLD Transport customer service centres, police stations and other government agencies. It will also be responsible for cross-checking new photographs with database records to detect fraud using biometric software.

QLD Transport land and safety director Judy Oswin said the smartcards will reduce the level fraud plaguing the existing laminated drivers licence.

“We have used the laminated licence design in QLD for over 20 years. The new digital licence will deliver a more secure form of driver licence documentation for Queenslanders as it is harder to forge or alter,” Oswin said in a statement.

“As a result it will help reduce the risk of identity theft to QLD licence holders and give them greater confidence that their personal licence information is being kept secure.

“It will also enable QLD Transport to deliver services in a more convenient manner as licence holders will be able to use a card reader or the [government] Web site to view, update and transact on their licence and registration themselves,” she said.

Overarching software , dubbed the Library of eID Artefacts, will monitor all components of the smartcard system to assist fraud investigations and trigger alerts if an individual is holding drivers licences under false names.

Some 10,000 handheld smartcard readers will be deployed across the state, which may include public terminals, homes, businesses, and pubs and clubs.

The licences are expected to cost about $20.

Function-creep is one of the biggest concerns with the New Queensland Drivers’ Licence (NQDL) which has been in planning and development since 2003. The Australian Law Reform Commission said allowing additional agencies to access smartcard data creates significant privacy risks because of the large amount of personal data stored on the cards.

While the QLD card will shun wireless connectivity and require direct contact with readers, a German group last year cracked the popular Mifare Classic Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) card by removing its chip and cutting layers away. The encryption algorithm was discovered after researchers stripped away layers and photographed the connections using a microscope.

Unisys deployed a similar smartcard for Malaysia, the MyKad identity card, which the company claims is the world’s first multi-application smartcard.

Gemalto to provide a new Queensland Driver Licence in Australia

7th of July 2009 | Gemalto

Gemalto’s secure Sealys* eDriver Licence solution selected by Department of Transport and Main Roads in partnership with Prime Contractor Placard Pty

Amsterdam, the Netherlands and Brisbane, Australia, July 7, 2009 – Gemalto (Euronext NL0000400653 GTO), the world leader in digital security announces that it will together with Prime Contractor Placard Pty Ltd provide several million Sealys e​lectronic driving licences to the Department of Transport and Main Roads in Queensland, Australia over a five year period with implementation commencing in 2010.

Currently, just over 3 million drivers in Queensland hold laminated driver licences on which personal data is printed. The new cards will significantly improve the security and privacy of personal data by securely storing driver information electronically. This will make the new licence difficult to copy and counterfeit and thereby minimizes the potential for identity theft.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads also plans to use this secure technology for the Adult Proof of Age, Marine Licence Indicator and Industry Authority cards.

The Department’s Land Transport and Safety Executive Director Judy Oswin says moving to this technology will place Queensland at the forefront of delivering sophisticated, and secure technology, bringing together a range of applications that will ensure a state of the art product is delivered.

The smartcard products will be a substantial leap forward in security over our existing laminated product. This is because of the strong level of authentication built into the physical product, as well as the business processes and systems that sit behind it; we will also be able to enhance electronic service delivery options for licence holders.”

“Queensland is pleased to be leading the first smartcard driver licence in Australia and believe that our ground breaking work will provide a sound basis for other states to build on, should they also decide to take on smartcard technology for their licence products,” Ms Oswin said.

Tan Teck Lee, President, Gemalto Asia added, “We are honored to be able to play a part in introducing leading security technology into driver licences issued by The Department of Transport and Main Roads. Gemalto is recognized as a leader in digital solutions boosting operational efficiency and increase security.”

Gemalto’s Sealys eDriver Licence solution is compliant with ISO 24727 standard and the Smartcard Framework and Smartcard Licence Interoperability Protocol (SLIP), which is the standard referenced to by the drivers licence project.

About Gemalto

Gemalto (Euronext NL 0000400653 GTO) is the world leader in digital secur​ity with 2008 annual revenues of €1.68 billion, and 10,000 employees operating out of 75 offices, research and service centers in 40 countries.

Gemalto is at the heart of our evolving digital society. The freedom to communicate, travel, shop, bank, entertain, and work—anytime, anywhere—has become an integral part of what people want and expect, in ways that are convenient, enjoyable and secure.

Gemalto delivers on the growing demands of billions of people worldwide for mobile connectivity, identity and data protection, credit card safety, health and transportation services, e-government and national security. We do this by supplying to governments, wireless operators, banks and enterprises a wide range of secure personal devices, such as subscriber identification modules (SIM) in mobile phones, smart banking cards, smart card access badges, electronic passports, and USB tokens for online identity protection. To complete the solution we also provide software, systems and services to help our customers achieve their goals.

As the use of Gemalto’s software and secure devices increases with the number of people interacting in the digital and wireless world, the company is poised to thrive over the coming years.

For more information please visit www.gemalto.com.

About Placard

Placard is a wholly owned Australian company, which has been in existence since 1987 as a manufacturer of plastic cards. Since then, Placard has continued to expand, and now provides comprehensive card program management products to over 500 clients and employs in excess of 170 staff. Placard is a well established, quality, total card solutions provider and has a reputation of meeting its commitments to its clients and consistently achieves service levels beyond its clients’ expectations.

Placard is the only secure card manufacturer in Australia and is recognised as the market leader in the country with a substantial card personalisation and fulfilment bureau.

Placard’s secure manufacturing and bureau facilities are both Visa and MasterCard accredited to the highest level including EMV accreditation.

Placard’s core competencies lie in the design, printing, manufacture, personalisation and mailing of ISO Standard secure and non secure plastic cards with Bureau services encompassing the latest Visa and MasterCard EMV standards for embossing, magnetic stripe encoding, indent printing, thermal print flat graphics, high quality Drop on Demand personalisation, laser printing processes and intelligent matching & mailing services.

For more information, please visit www.placard.com.au or call + 61 3 9722 5200 .

Contract awarded for new Driver Licence

July 2009 | A new Drive Licence for Queensland, Australia

In July 2009, Gemalto announced that it will together with Prime Contractor Placard Pty Ltd provide several million electronic driving licences to the Department of Transport and Main Roads in Queensland, Australia over a five year period with implementation commencing in 2010.

Currently, just over 3 million drivers in Queensland hold laminated driver licences on which personal data is printed. The new cards will significantly improve the security and privacy of personal data by securely storing driver information electronically. This will make the new licence difficult to copy and counterfeit and thereby minimizes the potential for identity theft.

The Department of Transport and Main Roads also plans to use this secure technology for the Adult Proof of Age, Marine Licence Indicator and Industry Authority cards.

Gemalto’s eDriver Licence solution is compliant with ISO 24727 standard and the Smartcard Framework and Smartcard Licence Interoperability Protocol (SLIP), which is the standard referenced to by the drivers licence project.


2010

July 2010 to June 2011 Licence Costs

  • One year | $37.35
  • Two years | $52.05
  • Five years | $96.05

Queensland’s new driver licence

12th of May 2010 | Media Statement

The Minister for Transport, The Honourable Rachel Nolan declared that Queensland will soon have the most secure drivers licence system in Australia!

  • Biometric imaging is used rather than the old Polaroid photo. What that means is that when your photo is taken at the CSC or police station, a 16 point computer image of your face is taken and stored on the computer. That makes it virtually impossible for someone else to come along later and try to get a fake licence in your name.
  • A number of visual security features including hologram, special inks, a watermark and shadowing.
  • A computer chip which stores your personal information, security PIN and shared secrets

Still talk of the computer chip with personal information, PIN and shared secrets which never eventuated so even up until the launch of the licence they were still misleading the public.

Providing the most secure licensing system in the country comes at a cost but the price of a Queensland licence will still compare favourably to other major Australian states.

The current cost of a five-year licence in Queensland is $73.30.

The new Queensland driver licence will initially cost $96.05 for five years, equal to around 37 cents per week.

Taking into account CPI and the cost of implementing the new system a new five-year licence in 2014-15 will cost $152.50 or around 58 cents a week.

Next financial year the most secure licence in the country will still be cheaper than licences in four other states.

And even in five years time, our licence will cost about the same as what drivers in NSW, South Australia and the ACT pay right now (NSW $151, ACT $145, SA $150).

Each time they renew their licence, facial image recognition technology will ensure they are who they claim to be.

Minister for Transport, The Honourable Rachel Nolan | 22nd of May 2010

The Government will undertake a carefully planned roll out of the new licensing system and Department of Transport and Main Roads staff will take part in an initial trial in August.

Following that Toowoomba residents, given the city’s mix of demographics and licence products, will be able to renew licences under the new system later in the year.


The last sentence is an outright lie, they had been promoting that it can be renewed online at this point so either the Minister for Transport was telling porkies or they knew nothing about their portfolio.

Justifying the increases by making it a price per week is beyond stupid and why stop there who not publicise the registration fees as a price per day!


Driver’s licences to double in price

12th of May 2010 | Brisbane Times

The price of Queensland driver’s licences is set to more than double as the state embraces new chip technology.

The new licences, embedded with a computer chip, will be introduced in Toowoomba before the end of this year, before becoming available across the state by the end of 2011.

Special biometric imaging will replace the current polaroid photo on laminated licences.

“The laminate driver’s licences currently in use across Queensland have been in existence for almost 25 years and are in need of a major overhaul,” Transport Minister Rachel Nolan said.

The price of a new five-year licence will initially rise from $73.30 to $96.05, before escalating again to $152.50 in 2014, an overall increase of 108 per cent.

The cost will be even greater for truck drivers who will need a separate heavy vehicle licence under the new system.

The price increase is the latest hit for the state’s drivers, after hefty registration cost increases came into effect last year, while the government scrapped the fuel subsidy.

brisbanetimes.com.au reported last year at how the new licence would begin rolling out in 2010.

RACQ spokesman Gary Fites said the price hike was justified given the new security for motorists.

”We can see a more justifiable price rise in this given for what is essentially for a new and improved product compared with far less justification for the toll increases and the sorts of registration increases we’ve seen,” Mr Fites said.

”This is something people pay for every five years. It’s not hitting them every year, and it’s not hitting them every time they fill up at the [bowser].

”We would have more concern if we were paying that sort of increase for essentially the same product.”

The biometric cameras needed in Queensland Transport offices and police stations will cost the state government $10,000 each to install and operate.

Smart licences have been six years in the planning and it is expected to take a further five before the rollout is complete.

Drivers will not be forced to switch to the new licences but will instead wait until their old ones expire.

Cards will still display traditional licencing information such as the licence number, name, date of birth, gender and height, address, class of licence and expiry date but the on-board microchip can be programmed with further data.

The chip will hold digital versions of the displayed information as well as digital certificates to prove the authenticity of the card as well as a “record of access” to show who has accessed information contained on the chip.

Security features on the new cards include facial recognition technology which links the card to an image, signature storage, high tech encryption and a PIN code which the cardholder must enter to allow authorities access to the information stored on the card.

Authorities have said only Queensland and interstate police, transport compliance officers and driver licensing authorities will be able to access information stored on the chip.

“Even police will need a court order to access the information,” Ms Nolan said.

Drivers will have a 16-point hologram taken of their face, which will be stored in a central information system.

“That makes it virtually impossible for someone else to come along later and try to get a fake licence in your name,” the minister said.

Ms Nolan said the new look licences were designed to protect the tens of thousands of victims of personal identity fraud in Queensland each year.


RACQ spokesman Gary Fites said the price hike was justified given the new security for motorists.

”We can see a more justifiable price rise in this given for what is essentially for a new and improved product compared with far less justification for the toll increases and the sorts of registration increases we’ve seen,” Mr Fites said.

”This is something people pay for every five years. It’s not hitting them every year, and it’s not hitting them every time they fill up at the [bowser].

”We would have more concern if we were paying that sort of increase for essentially the same product.”

The price hike is justified when they didn’t deliver on any of the promises! This is a new and improved product in what way?

What about those who renew every year? It makes no difference if you choose one, two, three, four or five years as you are still paying an excessive amount for something that costs under $10 in Europe for 5-10 years and that offers more security!

The RACQ said the same in 2014 so clearly they have an agenda to push that isn’t looking after the motorists of Queensland.

Security features on the new cards include facial recognition technology which links the card to an image, signature storage, high tech encryption and a PIN code which the cardholder must enter to allow authorities access to the information stored on the card.

Where is this PIN code they talk about? Seems that the government has failed to deliver.

Ms Nolan said the new look licences were designed to protect the tens of thousands of victims of personal identity fraud in Queensland each year.

Identity fraud continues to increase and looking at the statistics the new drivers licence has done nothing to abate that. Another failure.

“That makes it virtually impossible for someone else to come along later and try to get a fake licence in your name,” the minister said.

Except for the casual staff member who was able to issue 60 driver licences to people that already had licences under different names and the system that cost hundreds of millions did nothing to detect these duplicates.


New driver licence makes debut in Toowoomba

5th of November 2010 | Media Statement

The most secure driver licence system in Australia will make its public debut in Toowoomba today.

It’s a big day as we start to move from old laminated licences to delivering the most secure driver licence system in the country

When Queenslanders apply for their new licence a digital photograph will be taken and stored centrally.

Licences will also be mailed to customers within two weeks rather than being available on the spot.

“It’s just like getting your passport or a credit card. Licences will be produced at a central location meaning greater identity security and protection,” she said.

“It’s a big change but it will make Queensland licences the most secure in Australia – helping in the fight against fraud and identity theft.”

Ms Nolan said the new Queensland driver licence will initially cost $96.05 for five years, equal to around 37 cents per week.

Taking into account CPI and the cost of implementing the new system a new five-year licence in 2014-15 will cost $152.50 or around 58 cents a week – comparable to the current cost of licences in other states.

2011

2012

July 2012 to June 2013 Licence Costs

A 63 per cent increase over July 2010 to June 2011 cost

  • One year | $64.20
  • Two years | $89.50
  • Five years | $143.75

2013

Queensland drivers hit with licence increases

29th of May 2013 | CourierMail

QUEENSLAND motorists are being slugged with increases of up to 71 per cent for new smartcard driver’s licences since their rollout less than three years ago.

The cost of the new licences, which drivers can sign up for from one to five years, has risen by an average of 63 per cent since they were introduced in late 2010.

About half of the state’s 3.4 million registered drivers have already bought the new plastic credit-card sized licences but about 1.69 million drivers are still using the old laminate cards.

The cost of a one-year smartcard licence climbed by 71 per cent from $37.35 in 2010-11 to $64.20 in 2012-13.

The cost of a two-year smartcard licence also rose by 71 per cent from $52.05 to $89.50 in the same period.

Five-year smartcard licences rose by 49 per cent from $96.05 in 2010-11 to $143.75 in 2012-13.

A spokeswoman for Transport Minister Scott Emerson blamed the hefty increases on the former Labor government.

“The increase to the cost of a driver’s licence reflects the cost of producing the new card which was set under the previous government,” she said.

“Unfortunately this is another example of Labor’s reckless spending with no consideration for the impact it would have on taxpayers.”

The cost to roll out the new Queensland licensing system was about $139 million and it’s hoped all drivers will have migrated to the new technology by the end of 2017.

The Newman Government is looking at ways to reduce the data added to the chip and help make it smaller and cheaper which would help reduce the computer systems needed to manage the licences and cut costs.

The cards have a number of visual and technological security features designed to make it easier to identify forgeries.

Queensland Council of Social Service director Mark Henley said the rising costs to smartcard licences was yet another increasing cost for Queenslanders.

“I think it’s really important that the Government has a holistic view of any of the prices or costs that they passed on to the public with goods or services they provide such a licence,” he said.

“They need to have a line of sight of what the overall impact is for people.

“One of the biggest problems people face is managing the increasing costs across a variety of services and this is another increase in cost people have to wear.”

RACQ executive manager of public policy Michael Roth said the licence increases were “steep” but their implementation of the system was “a good decision.”

The option to renew laminated licences was phased out in October.

Drivers cannot upgrade from a laminated card to a smartcard online, it must be completed at a Department of Transport office.

Smartcard users are able to renew their cards electronically.


The Newman Government is looking at ways to reduce the data added to the chip and help make it smaller and cheaper which would help reduce the computer systems needed to manage the licences and cut costs.

Seriously?!? The Minister believes that the amount of data written to a tiny amount of memory has anything to with the cost of the cards and why did they achieve nothing in relation to the cost of the drivers licence in their time in government? Once again a Minister criticises the previous government, promises to reduce costs but does nothing.

The card already has none of the features that were promised so what’s actually stored on the card? The police don’t have readers so why bother putting anything on the card as the chip is not used! There’s your cost saving, replace the chip card with a standard card like they should have used in the first place but of course as you’ll find out further down the cost of the card is not the issue. The government is using this card as an excuse to tax us through yet another fee that doesn’t reflect the cost of providing the service.

RACQ executive manager of public policy Michael Roth said the licence increases were “steep” but their implementation of the system was “a good decision.”

Another failure from the RACQ who are totally out of touch with the motorists they claim to represent. They continue to turn themselves into a large corporation that exits only to make huge profits.

How can a card that does nothing that it was claimed to do be a good decision?

The cost to roll out the new Queensland licensing system was about $139 million and it’s hoped all drivers will have migrated to the new technology by the end of 2017.

This new technology of course isn’t actually being used so what did we get for $139 million? In 2003 they quoted the price as $60 million for an government roll out and a likely no cost roll out if they enter into a public/private partnership like they did so how did the prices increase by $139 million or more and why is no-one held accountable for this excessive waste of taxpayer funds?

2014

Fake Queensland drivers’ licences being investigated by crime commission amid terror identity fears

22nd of September 2014 | Cairns Post

A CRIME and Corruption Commission investigation is underway into a major fraud involving Queensland drivers’ licences, that may have helped would-be terrorists develop new identities.

A casual employee of Transport and Main Roads — who News Corp Australia understands had her employment terminated in December — is at the centre of the investigation which has been kept quiet by the department and the CCC.

It is alleged she issued upwards of 60 fraudulent licences in return for payment of $1000 each.

Sources within the department have revealed the employee allegedly “overrode” the Transport Integrated Customer Access (TICA) system to issue the licences.

The cards themselves were uncompromised.

A CCC spokesman confirmed an investigation was underway and it was “ongoing”.

“The Department of Transport and Main Roads is fully cooperating and assisting the CCC,” said the spokesman.

Staff who worked with the woman are among those who have been interviewed over the alleged fraud.

University of Queensland national security expert Professor Brian Lovell said a fake drivers licence would be considered a valuable commodity for people with criminal intent.

“If you look at the 9-11 attackers, there were 19 of them, and they had 63 drivers’ licences between them,” said Prof Lovell.

“A fake driver’s licence gives you a false identity so you can hide your trail.”

He said someone with a fake driver’s licence in Australia could easily rent a three-tonne truck and pack it with explosives.

“The Queensland licensing system is very, very strong (security wise) but if you’ve got someone on the inside issuing licences to people who have bad agendas, that’s of grave concern,” Prof Lovell said.

Queensland drivers’ licences underwent a major overhaul in late 2010 to increase their security and prevent fraud.

As well as being embedded with a computer chip, the licences feature holograms and special ink to make them almost impossible to replicate.

Information posted on the TMR website states the former laminated licence “became increasingly vulnerable to tampering and fraud and needed to be replaced with more secure technology”.

Their introduction resulted in a doubling of the price for a five-year licence from $75 to $154.

Motorists generally have to wait up to two weeks for a new licence while they are made by Victorian company Placard and returned to Queensland.

The “unsmiling” images featured on the licences have been unpopular with motorists but lauded by experts as a key to reducing crime, and even terrorism.

The CCC refused to say what the fraudulently issued licences were being used for, or if they had been recovered by the crime-fighting agency.

It is also unknown what changes, if any, have been implemented at TMR to prevent the issue of licences without proper authorisation.

A department spokesman said they were unable to comment because it was the subject of an ongoing investigation by the CCC.


So much for the facial recognition system that was supposed to prevent people getting multiple drivers licences in different names. Why did we spend so many hundreds of millions for systems that don’t do what they claim?

2015

2016

2017

July 2017 to June 2018 drivers licence cost

  • One year licence | $76.25
  • Two year licence | $106.30
  • Three year licence | $131.55
  • Four year licence | $152.20
  • Five year licence | $170.75

2018

July 2018 to June 2019 drivers licence cost

  • One year licence | $78.90
  • Two year licence | $110.00
  • Three year licence | $136.15
  • Four year licence | $157.55
  • Five year licence | $176.75

Comparison of cards

Italy

Gemalto the same company that produces the card used in Queensland has a more advanced contactless version of the card used in Italy as a national ID card. The cost of this card is 16.79 Euros with an average cost of 23 Euros because some areas charge an administrative fee.

The contactless electronic identity card is a polycarbonate document including full name, date and place of birth, fiscal number, residence and citizenship, code of the city of issuance, issuance and expiration dates, authentication certificate, fingerprints and a digital version of the photo.

It appears the card has no expiry date so assuming 10 years this is AUD $30 or $3 per year but the Queensland Government charge us an extra $15 per year on top of the savings they are making by not having to produce their own cards inhouse.

The Rest of Europe

Costs vary from country to country but looking at countries with similar cards (these are not driver licences but are cards with the same or more capabilities inbuilt for which we are being charged over $15 per year by the Queensland Government). If these countries can supply these cards so cheaply why are we paying so much?

Estonia | €25 for 5 years

Germany | €28.80 for 10 years

Hungary | Free

Lithuania | €8.6 per 10 years (Same card as Queensland)

Implementation Costs

It’s hard to find a comparison however one system implemented in Bulgaria cost USD $139 million for a 10 year contract to develop and supply a system for issuing biometric identity documents. This includes 1 million passports and 2.8 million identity documents.

Estonia has a far more advanced contactless card that can be used to vote, public transport and a lot more and is used for ID cards, residence permit cards, digital IDs and diplomatic IDs. A new 5 year contract for this service cost €40 million | AUD $60 million.

The Estonian ID cards are used in health care, electronic banking, signing contracts, public transit, encrypting email and voting. Estonia offers over 600 e-services to citizens and 2400 to businesses. The card’s chip stores digitised data about the authorised user, most importantly: the user’s full name, gender, national identification number, and cryptographic keys and public key certificates.

The newest version of Estonia’s ID card, featuring additional security elements and a contactless interface. The new cards also utilise Estonia’s own font and elements of its brand. One new detail is the inclusion of a QR code, which will make it easier to check the validity of the ID card. The new design also features a color photo of its bearer, which doubles as a security element and is made up of lines; looking at the card at an angle, another photo appears. The new ID cards, however, have contactless functionality built in. The new chip has a higher capacity, allowing us to add new applications to it.

The promised features from 2003

Let’s see how this card delivered on it’s promises from 2003. Failed promises have a strike through them.

  • Reduce identity fraud
  • Allow you to keep emergency contact details on the card (all police cars would be fitted out with readers)
  • Remove the need for address on the licence (all businesses that need the address would have to have card readers to read the address for example at the time video stores, car rentals etc)
  • Allow business to be transacted online with the Transport Department
  • Public transport payment card
  • Used for vending machine and small transactions in stores

Summary

In summary the promises of the “Smart Card” were over-stated and aside from a higher security card that could have been achieved through the use of card printers replacing the existing laminating machines there has been no benefit except to the private companies involved in the manufacturing of the cards and systems that support it. Instead of choosing an off the shelf system as used throughout Europe we choose instead to deal with multiple companies to produce a solution to a problem that not only did not exist but we wasted vast amounts for features that will never be used.

Other countries have continued to update their cards and allowed them to be used for public transport and many other useful applications, our politicians just talk about us being a world leader all the time but nothing could be further from the truth. Politicians should be held responsible for their actions, they are paid incredibly well by world standards, they have vast resources at their snouts fingertips but they continue to mislead the public and throw away taxpayer money because there are no ramifications.

The quoted cost of implementing this system was $139 million however drivers are paying around $15 a year extra and with 3.6 million drivers in 2017 this is an additional cost of $54 million per year since 2010. By the year 2019 the government has profited by around $400 million and delivered a product that offers nothing that the deployment of secure card printers to each Transport office would have offered. By the time they look at replacing these cards it will be 2025-30 and over a billion dollars will have been wasted.

Ministers who should represent the taxpayer seem to instead be pushing the technology that lobby groups are promoting. What has occurred with the “Smart Card” licence in Queensland is nothing short of criminal, in the 9 years since implementation the additional costs to drivers has been in the order of $540 million of which over $400 million is profit for a “Smart Card” that delivered nothing.

Other countries like Estonia are actually leading the way with innovation, the Queensland Governments idea of innovation is to talk about it in Media Statements thinking that if they repeat it enough it will come true and they will fool citizens into believing their rubbish.

And to top it off they have just announced they are looking at creating a new digital drivers licence for your smartphone, yet another solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.

Identity theft is still an issue and one partial solution to this problem would be to have a drivers licence number that changes with each renewal but operates in a similar way to virtual credit card numbers. The card number stays the same behind the scenes but from outwards appearance this is a new number. If you think that your drivers licence has been compromised just order a renewal and it will give you a new drivers licence number and the old one is voided. When someone applies for credit using the old card number it is flagged as expired and doesn’t go through.

This new driver licence was supposed to reduce the amount of identity fraud but it has achieved nothing as most fraud is committed online using your drivers licence number. Imagine if they used a system like in Estonia where you could use a secure smart card to prove your identity.