Sir, – You suggest that shops that don’t have the “fancy” machines will not only accept the returnable cans and bottles but will issue a voucher to the person (“The deposit return scheme: Everything you need to know”, Your Money, January 22nd). Not so.
Many outlets that sell or provide beverages contained in the cans and bottles are entitled to an exemption from takeback once the store is 250 square metres or less. They will all charge the deposit on those “in-scope” products but are not obliged to accept the empty containers. The reason for this derogation is because the logo or barcode on the products are susceptible to counterfeiting and fraudulent conversion. The machines have sophisticated technology that identifies inappropriate presentations and rejects them; there is no comparable technology available to stores that have neither the sales, space or finances to spend in excess of €15,000 on a machine that the State is making zero contribution for, either by way of a grant or by a tax incentive .
There are very real food safety concerns regarding the storage of cans and bottles that have not been compacted and are kept in large plastic bags awaiting collection; there are security concerns, staff safety concerns and potential litigation issues.
The operators and the Department of the Environment had, from the outset, elected not to take these concerns seriously and made no provision for the needs of (non-supermarket) smaller stores.
It is unrealistic for a sales assistant to be expected to accept 10 or 20 assorted cans and bottles, reeking of alcohol and syrup, handle each one to see if there is a return logo on it (and have sufficient prowess to identify a fake) and calculate the numbers that qualify at 15 cent and the number at 25 cent. All of this is done while other customers are waiting patiently to pay for their goods. In the event that a product that emanated from outside the jurisdiction is presented and the assistant refuses to credit them the presenter will, assuming they don’t argue the refusal (not likely in all instances), leave the offending item behind on the counter and shopfloor and expect the store to dispose of it.
The suggestion that a voucher would be given and that a store operating a manual return would print off a voucher does not make sense. If a return were processed, the person giving in the cans would get their deposit back, in cash or applied as a credit against a purchase being made at the time that the products are being accepted, shops would not engage in giving vouchers for exchange at some future moment, and it would complicate further a cost-incurring process.
The removal of 500 million cans and bottles that litter our country (75 per cent of the two billion put onto the market are successfully captured at the moment) is a worthy target; all retailers are happy to play a part in this project, but it’s a pity that the State has not paid sufficient attention to the minutiae of the scheme or heeded the frequent calls from our sector on the inadequacies of the plans when seeking to manage rural and isolated communities. – Yours, etc,
VINCENT JENNINGS,
CEO,
Convenience Stores & Newsagents Association of Ireland,
Naas,
Co Kildare.