Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
If you listen to this show on the regular, you
will know that I think that the green bins need
to be axed, you know the ones I'm talking about,
the little green bits you're supposed to put your food
scraps in, and particularly they need to be axed in Auckland.
Good news, So does the Auckland Ratepayers Alliance, who've launched
a campaign to get rid of them. Sam Warren is
a spokesperson with US.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Now, Hey Sam, hi, yeah there, how are you?
Speaker 1 (00:19):
I'm very well, thank you. Now, why do you think
they need to be gone? And why do you care
about it enough to launch a campaign?
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Look at this rate I don't know whether to laugh
or cry. The more we dig into it, the more
it doesn't make sense Economically. Auckland Council spends about thirty
six million dollars a year on the program. That's a lot,
and only a third of Auckland is actually use it,
and even that number seems high. There's no opt out function,
and particularly for households that compost their own waste, you
know they don't use it, why should they pay for it?
(00:47):
But secondly, it doesn't actually stack up from an environmental
point The amount we're spending on the carbon reduction far
less could be spent just through ETS credits or planting trees.
So it makes no sense either way. You shake it,
see enough, because because what.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
You could do right because at the moment, the carbon cost,
the cost for every unit of carbon that we save
by chucking it in little green bins and then chucking
it in the back of the truck, then taking it
to somewhere, then putting it on trucks to reperoi and
blah blah blah, is costing us about fourteen hundred dollars
per carbon unit. Right when we could go to the
easiest we could pay fifty dollars, and then what we
could do sam is we could take the remaining thirteen
(01:24):
hundred and fifty dollars and we could spend it on
planting trees, and we would actually be doing better for
the environment, wouldn't we than what we're doing right now?
Speaker 2 (01:31):
You would? So look, I can only suspect council have
wanted to be seen to be doing something. They want
to be green, and it's actually not what's happened. It's
bad planning and rate payers deserve a lot better.
Speaker 1 (01:42):
I reckon too, Right now, what is this business about
the three million dollars on comms and advertising? What's going
on here?
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Oh? I did think to ask counsel how much they've
spent promoting the program. It's actually three million and two
hundred and fifty thousand dollars, I should say. So that includes,
you know, six hundred thousand an agency to make their
concepts and everything, one point four million on paid media
all sorts. And can I just remind you only a
third of Aucklander's even use the bench.
Speaker 1 (02:10):
The thing is, there's a context for me though, Sam,
because you know pr is not cheap, I mean, you
have to pay something for it. So is that an
excessive spend?
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Well, it's excessive because this whole program shouldn't exist in
the first place. A feasibility studies should have counted all
the carbon and all of you know, they should have
known it doesn't work. And councils up and down the
country are actually switching on to the fact that it
doesn't make sense. Fung A new Eat, for example, pulled
out of it, and we want Auckland to do just
the same.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
What's the population of Auckland. Is it one point five
or one point two million?
Speaker 2 (02:41):
Oh? I think it's towards one point six these.
Speaker 1 (02:43):
Days, is it Okay? So let's just go one point
five for ease. Right. So if a third of us
are using, that's five hundred thousand of us, right, And
it means that they are spending what's six dollars for
each of those people to get them to use the
green bins just in advertising and pr That's a dumb spend,
isn't it.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
Look I'd say, so we need smarter spending, and I
really think a bit more accountability.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Now have you heard because somebody emailed me and said
to me that eighty percent of water is going to
eperore and those trucks is actually water? Is that true?
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Yes, a few people have reached out with the same
number from what I can gather, Yes, that's a lot.
How is the recursor? Well, I mean these are food scraps. Obviously,
it's a lot of water material inside it. And you'd
think you'd squeeze that all out before shipping all that
weight two hundred kilometers out of town down to Epiol.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
Don't you just like that's what you do, isn't it?
When you know when you're filling up your little truck
buckets at the sea and stuff. You just open the tray,
you let the water out. Why wouldn't they just let
a bit of water out?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
And then lost person would say that hither? But I
think you're giving counsel too much credit right now.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
This is unbelievable. Okay, so listen, how committed to you
to getting rid of these bins? I'm at about a
solid seven out of ten? Can you?
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Oh? Ten? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Right?
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Look at the very least I want to see the
ability to opt out if you want to pay for it.
I don't know why you would by all means that option,
but other people not using it shouldn't have to pay
for it. Yeah, it's as simple as that.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Sam, Your reputation now relies on you have got to
get rid of these bins for the Auckland rate Payers
Alliance's reputation. Okay, I'll do my best head on and
for mine as it would transpire. Thank you, Sam. I
appreciate it, right, Sam and I are in the team
on this one. Sam Warren, Auckland rate Payers Alliance. Those
bins are gone. For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive
listen live to news talks. It'd be from four pm
(04:28):
weekdays or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio,