If you want to crack down on fly-tipping, consider making the dump cheaper – Editorial

For the worst of offenders, a crackdown is reasonable, but we must also address the root cause of the offending – high dumping fees. Photo / Michael Cunningham

Editorial

THE FACTS

• The Ministry for the Environment plans to amend the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 and the Litter Act 1979.
• Amendments would allow fines using vehicle registration details and recovery of clean-up costs.
• Societal factors like rising dump fees are key reasons for fly-tipping, needing broader solutions.

It’s time for a bit of a fly-tipping crackdown, the Ministry for the Environment says.

We’ve all seen it – broken fridges, TVs, black rubbish bags full of rubbish thrown beside highways and rivers, in parks and public carparks.

It’s a blemish on New Zealand’s clean, green image and it’s high time something was done.

The ministry’s plan is amendments to the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) and Litter Act 1979 (the Litter Act).

Right now, as Hastings councillor Wendy Schollum noted last week, you have to be physically caught in the act of fly-tipping before anything is done about your behaviour.

If councils put up CCTV and spot you and the vehicle you use for fly-tipping? Unenforceable.

If your car number plate is noted by a member of the public as you throw a full bag of rubbish out of the window on to the verge? Unenforceable.

If there’s a letter with your name on it inside the pile of rubbish you’ve dropped? Unenforceable.

Right now, councils are paying thousands, tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to clean up messes they can’t punish people for causing.

The amendments, if they go through, will change that a little. They’ll allow litter-control officers to issue fines using vehicle registration and vehicle ownership details – ie after the fact, not during.

Councils would also be able to recover clean-up costs from the offender if the dumped rubbish caused significant environmental harm – and there would be tiered penalties based on the seriousness of the offence.

Schollum says she’s hopeful the amendments will also allow the officers to use evidence such as identifying details inside the rubbish to nab offenders.

This would be controversial – especially for renters who move address regularly and could find themselves unwittingly in the gun for forgetting to change the address for one particular organisation.

It’s also not clearly stated as an end game of the amendments in the consultation documents.

Councils would be wise to think long and hard before instructing litter-control officers to go that far.

What the amendments also don’t focus on are the reasons why people fly-tip in the first place. It’s rare to find a person who enjoys fouling the environment.

Societal factors, in particular the rising cost of dump fees, are the main reason people offload their damaged goods on the side of the road.

For the worst of offenders, a crackdown is reasonable.

But we must also address the root cause of the offending – and stop the public places around deprived communities being turned into fly-tipping hotspots – by making the dump an accessible place for all Kiwis.