The new litter pollution legislation announced by the Minister for the Environment, Mr Howlin, yesterday, will serve a very valuable purpose if it succeeds in changing the culture of indifference to the appearance of streets and public places that afflicts so much: of our society. The casual dumping of cigarette packets and other rubbish from moving cars, the lack of care in tying up bags of household waste left out for collection, the failure to tidy up after the binmen have done their rounds - these are signs of a decline in public spirit that needs to be reversed.
Ours is a litter rich society that has not a compensating sense of responsibility. Last week the Green Party environment spokesman, Mr Gerry Boland, drew attention to the deplorable standards of many shop owners, restaurateurs, publicans and other Dublin business people who heap up the messy remnants of food and packaging outside their premises to await collection, turning the streets, in Mr Boland's graphic phrase, into a rubbish tip. This is regular practice, as anyone who walks around the capital knows.
During the summer this newspaper annually publishes letters from foreign visitors praising our scenery and our hospitality but denouncing our lack of cleanliness. Mr Howlin yesterday talked about the economic cost of litter pollution, incurred when it deters potential investors or drives away tourists. But the appeal should not only be to self interest but to self pride and also regard for fellow citizens. That is where a culture change is called for.
But the onus, as the Minister pointed out, should not only be on enforcement, as is proposed, for example, by raising fines for owners of dogs fouling the pavements and parks to a draconian level, but also on encouragement. Compliance will always be undermined by forgetfulness or a furtive disregard of the law so long as the stress is perceived as mainly negative. In many parts of Britain bins are provided for depositing pooper scoops"; in Paris and other French towns pets can use the street gutters as an alternative. And, as the Green Party has suggested, the French example of providing wheeled containers for refuse is one that Dublin could follow.
Mr Howlin, in his concern about the economic consequences of pollution, ought not to overlook the fact that the State itself is a major beneficiary of a healthy tourism industry, and would lose nothing from financing some of the necessary facilities.
There are obligations in the proposed Bill for the local authorities as well, notably in drawing up targets and ensuring they are met by promoting anti litter awareness, and by being given powers to move against house owners and business people who persistently fail to deal with litter on or near their properties. In this day and age it is regrettable, however, not to see some reference to sorting and recycling in anti litter legislation. The record of the local authorities in this regard has been inadequate and sporadic at best, and the practice needs to be properly resourced.