The debate over container deposits is set to heat up further in coming months.

The Total Environment Centre has acted on its long-held view that the Australian Packaging Covenant was ineffective in improving recycling rates, writes Paula Wallace.

Long-time Total Environment Centre chief Jeff Angel in November circulated a letter addressed to the CEO of the Australian Packaging Covenant (APC) in which he announced the NGO's resignation from the council, a position it has held since 2005. He didn't hold back on his reasons.

"I believe that my position has become severely compromised with the recent promotion by the beverage industry of a $20m pa scheme directed at littering and recycling to enhance, or as an adjunct to, the Australian Packaging Covenant, as an alternative to a national container deposit system (CDS)," wrote Angel.

The beverage industry's voluntarily commitment to fund more recycling at home and away-from-home was announced in November and follows a year of escalating tensions between advocates and detractors of a CDS.

The TEC's withdrawal mirrors the walk out of The Boomerang Alliance from container deposit discussions hosted by the Environmental Protection and Heritage Council (EPHC) a few months ago, citing a "rigged" outcome.

Boomerang Alliance spokesperson David West said at the time that a broader packaging study agreed at the EPHC forum was biased by the inclusion of cardboard, which would skew the recycling rate to the high side.

Stan Moore has been CEO of the APC since mid-2010. He told WME Angel's resignation letter came as a complete surprise, especially as the $20 million initiative was not an APC program.

"That program is currently being flagged by the Product Stewardship Forum... there's no APC funding attached to it," he said.

However, the voluntary scheme went head-to-head with a CDS proposal in the analysis of a Regulatory Impact Statement, which has just been released.

Moore defended the APC, which he noted has a wide reach and covers an array of packaging materials beyond beverage containers.

"It doesn't discriminate between packaging materials or their uses and clearly focuses on increasing overall recycling rates of all materials. The current overall recycling rate is 63.1 per cent and we have a target of 70 per cent by the end of 2015," he said.

Angel and Moore differ over the APC-derived data. Angel said "when paper and cardboard (non-beverage) material is removed from the data, beverage container recycling languishes at just above 42 per cent".

Moore said the latest 2010/11 figures show the recycling rate for all containers, including aerosols, is 61.6 per cent.

For aluminium cans it is 64 per cent and for general plastic packaging (including plastic beverage containers) it is 37.5 per cent.

Either way, Angel is unswayed by such numbers, pointing to the recent release of an international study by PricewaterhouseCoopers "showing the massive benefits from a CDS - rrecycling rates above 80 per cent; better quality recyclate to make new bottles; and excellent coexistence with kerbside recycling.

"We are more convinced than over that a CDS is the way to go," he said.

Legitimacy issues
Angel described TEC's association with the APC Council as "difficult at times in the early years as the APC did not appear to be making any real improvement to the packaging problem".

"You will recall we eventually came to the conclusion that the improvements in the recycling of packaging were not able to be all attributed to the APC. In fact, almost all of it is the result of council supported kerbside collections and strong market demand, which would continue even if the APC did not exist," his letter stated.

Moore agreed much of the APC's early work was to make the kerbside recycling service viable, but it also needed to engage other parts of the packaging chain.

"Our natural progression has moved from working with kerbside to away-from-home recycling because consumers want to recycle. It's a matter now of ensuring they have the opportunity to do so," he said.

Moore argued the real strength of the APC was in bringing together "all the various parties, including community representatives, to the table to discuss strategies and packaging policy and programs". It is, he said, an approach unique to Australia and apparently the envy of regulators and industry around the world.

Moore said there is "no council position on container deposits", insisting the approach of the APC is "one in which the whole supply chain are all involved".

However, Angel believes the APC has now been placed "in clear opposition to a national CDS", adding "it is clear to me and others that the greatest weakness in packaging recycling is beverage containers and neither the APC nor an industry fund will make much headway on a major litter and environmental problem".

He also alleged a conflict of interest: "The situation is further exacerbated by the APC chair being Alec Wagstaff, Corporate Affairs Manager of Coca Cola Amatil and chief lobbyist against a CDS."

TEC had advised against extending Wagstaff's term from the standard one year, however the council voted at its May meeting to extend the term of the industry representative.

The chair rotates on an annual basis, through a three year cycle with local government, the Environment Protection Heritage Council (EPHC) and industry each chairing for one year.

"In fact our council considered the chairman's role, how they were appointed, and the government representatives re-confirmed their extensive consideration of the appointment for a second term of Alec Wagstaff as chair," said Moore.

"And he sits on that council as the Product Stewardship Forum representative, he doesn't sit there with a Coca-Cola hat on."

The council has four state and federal government representatives, four council members, seven industry figures and places for two community figures.

"It's a body that acts by way of consensus and so there is no one group or party that would have any veto or rights over and beyond any others in that group," said Moore.