MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS have a significant impact on the environment of small-island states. Such businesses should be mindful of the fragile ecosystem in which they operate.
As corporate citizens, they should voluntarily demonstrate a commitment to safeguard the environment for the benefit of their employees, customers, stakeholders and the wider community.
It has been 30 years since the Returnable Containers Act was passed on June 1, 1986. A casual read of it will confirm that there is a need for this act to be revised and updated. The variety of containers mentioned needs to be extended. There are several “players”, other than bottlers, distillers and distributors of beverages, who also need to be included under this act.
Here is a call for the Ministry of Environment and Drainage to re-examine and intensify the compliance requirements of local manufacturers and distributors who trade in goods which are contained in disposable and returnable containers.
The public wants to be assured that the main aim of this legislation is not necessarily only for the reuse of the returnable containers. The act should require the respective manufacturers and distributors to enable and facilitate the prompt removal of all reusable and disposable (empty) containers from the environment.
There is a simple “win-win” solution to the effective and successful removal of containers from the environment. The inclusion of an environmental levy in the price of the purchased items should not just end there.
A specific amount of the levy should be apportioned to individual “collectors” of these containers. It has been proven that this serves to substantially escalate the rate of removal from the environment. An added benefit is that significant enough, casual employment opportunities are generated.
Health challenges
A responsible and proactive Government, of the people, will do well to ensure that measures are taken to pre-empt the outbreak of health challenges that result from the indiscriminate and irresponsible disposal of those containers with which the act is concerned.
Legislation to protect the environment, without enforcement or compliance mechanisms, serves little purpose. It is quite evident that currently there are established companies which are in violation of the Returnable Containers Act 1986.
It is unfortunate that in the schedule of the act, where the refusal or reduction of the stipulated refund results in unfair trading, the Fair Trading Commission, when approached, seems unwilling to intervene. Complainants, in such an instance, are referred to the Ministry of the Environment and Drainage, under which the act falls.
Alternatively, the ministry, when approached on the matter of infringement of the refund schedule of the act, seems to absolve itself from matters relating to the refund portion of the schedule and focuses only on the other aspects of the act.
Similarly, the Ministry of Health is hesitant when approached on matters pertaining to this act, although the violation of the law has direct, adverse consequences on the health of the entire nation.
As it relates to the Returnable Containers Act 1986, it appears as though when the ordinary citizen has legitimate concerns or grievances deriving from violations, they are left in a state of quandary, while their concerns or grievances go unresolved.
Alternatively, the major corporate citizens continue to openly disregard the act, and their defiant violation remains unchallenged by the statutory authorities of Government.
– ALFRED BRANCH