International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

However, earmarking reduces flexibility in public finances so ought to be withdrawn
when the funds objectives have been met. 1131 Equally, if levies increase, and if, as a
result of inelastic responses, the total revenue generated increases, questions should
be asked as to whether the size of the fund might simply generate waste in the use of
revenues. Although there are no examples of the fund actually being withdrawn, the
following evidence shows examples of continuous evaluation.
Taking the case of the landfill tax in the UK, this was introduced in order to reduce the
reliance upon landfilling of waste. Despite being ongoing since 1997, the fund did
change from the Landfill tax Credit Scheme to the Landfill Community Fund and in
doing so the objectives of the fund were shifted to a greater focus on communities
affected by landfills sites. This shift shows that evaluation of the fund was taking
place and potentially old objectives were deemed either unnecessary or they had
been met.
A similar example of good practice occurred in Western Australia when their Waste
Management and Recycling Fund (WMRF) (funded by the landfill levy) was suspended
in 2002 whilst a review was undertaken. Following this, the focus of the funding
strongly shifted to a zero waste focus and a series of Zero Waste Schemes were
introduced under the new Strategic Waste Initiatives Schemes, in 2004. 1132 It was felt
that although there was some merit to the previous funding expenditures, they lacked
innovation and leadership.
The ALSF was introduced in 2002 as a two-year pilot scheme which has been
extended by between 1 and 3 years ever since, currently up until 2011. This has been
through a series of reviews and consultations. There are no definitive indications at
this stage as to whether or not it will be renewed yet again, but it seems likely that
this will occur.
60.6.2 Centralised Public Finance
In contrast to funding sourced from taxation, centrally financed public grants tend to
be available for a limited period of time and with specific objectives in mind. Each
programme has a specific launch date and deadline date for application and date
marking the end of the availability of the fund.
For example, WRAP’s capital funding stream which focused on increasing
plasterboard recycling was launched in February 2007 and applications had to be
received by 30 th April 2007. Projects receiving the funding had to be operational by
the following March.
1131 OECD (2007) Policy Brief: Making Environmental Spending Count, Available:
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/1/18/39376495.pdf
1132 Western Australia Department of Environment and Conservation (2009) Waste Management,
Website available:
http://portal.environment.wa.gov.au/portal/page?_pageid=53,34379&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTA
L
919
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes