I had not intended to speak again in Committee—no doubt, the Minister will be greatly relieved to hear that—but, as the noble Lord moving the amendment mentioned my name and as I am genuinely puzzled by Amendment No. 183L, which deals with kitchen waste, I wish to ask a question.
I do not know what kitchen waste is. In my borough, Wandsworth, we have quite an efficient council. I split up the paper, vast quantities of which come uninvited through my door, including mail order and all the communications that come to Members of the House. It is unwanted and unread, and I have to dispose of it. One container takes the plastic wrapping which, irritatingly, is on all the paper and has to be separated from it and put in another container, otherwise the paper is not taken. I have a container for bottles, and the rest is kitchen waste. The tops from the bottles, which I solemnly unscrew, I pop in there, and the aluminium containers for the food that, I confess, I occasionally buy from my local supermarket when I am looking after myself tend to go into the same container. Basically, for most households, kitchen waste is the residue. I do not think that many households actually separate out the food content from all the other content of the rubbish. It is not clear whether that is what the mover of the amendment wants us to do or whether it is practical in operation.
In my home in Wales the situation is similar. We are in a remote area, and so we do not have such a good separation unless we go down to the disposal area. We put all the bottles, plastic or glass, in one container; we do not put paper in another container because it is not collected, and we have to burn it on the bonfire in my garden or dispose of it in some other way. Again, the residue is the kitchen waste, and you put everything else into that container. It is not a large quantity; it is the smallest quantity.
In this legislation we have a problem not only with definitions but with suggestions that we break up things in a way in which most people do not in the normal course of their life and which they might find quite difficult. We must have practicable, workable schemes. The scheme in Wandsworth to which I referred is quite practicable and workable. If you take all the other items that I have not included in the list in the back of your car down to the rubbish collection area, you can dispose of your garden rubbish, batteries and all the other things in separate containers. It is very efficient, and it works quite well.
I hope that we will not be running a scheme that forces the ordinary citizen, including the old-age pensioner, to start worrying about what they put into the container in their kitchen where the balance of their rubbish goes. Let us be practicable about the schemes.
Climate Change Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Crickhowell
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 30 January 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Climate Change Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
698 c686-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:41:56 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_441419
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_441419
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_441419