HOUSEHOLDERS who throw away too much rubbish face a new 'bin tax' under radical government plans to force them to change their habits.
Ministers have backed the idea of a 'pay-as-you-throw' scheme under which household rubbish would be charged for according to weight.
People who significantly cut back on unrecyclable waste would have their council tax reduced, while those who re
fuse to mend their ways would face hefty charges.
The move comes with Environment Minister Ross Finnie this week launching a household waste strategy to increase recycling rates.
Households now dump more than 3.5 million tonnes of rubbish a year, with each home on average contributing well over a tonne. Around 25% of the waste is recycled.
Finnie is giving "serious thought" to a bin tax as ministers seek new ways to push recycling rates up to more than 55% by 2020. Under his favoured scheme, households would be allotted a waste entitlement, and would have to pay extra if they used it up.
He said: "Because the equipment is becoming available you could begin to think of setting a fixed charge [for the waste], and then say 'if you better that, you will get an incentive and if you dump more then you pay'.
"My view would be to isolate that part of the council tax and say we are going to handle this separately."
Support for such a plan has been voiced by many local authorities. They believe the bin tax should be specified on council tax bills in the same way as water and sewage charges, with the sums varying according to the amounts thrown away.
In the Belgian region of Flanders, where the scheme was set up, rates of recycling shot up from 20% to over 70%.
Finnie will also use the launch of the strategy this week to set new targets to cut the amount of food dumped by homes. Unused food accounts for 17% of all waste thrown into bins by households.
Among his targets are supermarket two-for-one offers which, he claims, lead to massive waste problems.
He said: "It appears to be superficially attractive, but if the capacity of the household is actually to consume just one then a two-for-one deal means that any goods that are sold... are put into waste.
"I am not denying the right of the consumer to get a good deal. It does seem to me that the evidence is suggesting that people are being persuaded to purchase food way in excess of their requirements, and the proof of that is the 17%."
Finnie also said producers needed to look at the packaging of products. He singled out whisky bottles sold in several layers of packaging.
Fiona Moriaty, director of the Scottish Retail Consortium, said supermarket chains were now signed up to reducing packaging in their goods. "There has been a huge commitment by all the main food retailers to address the impact that the provision of goods and services is having on the environment."
Finnie's support for a pay-as-you-throw scheme met with a mixed response.
Duncan McLaren, director of Friends of the Earth, said: "What we have argued for is some kind of financial incentive to encourage households to reduce waste."
A spokesman for the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities said that ministers should focus on getting retailers to reduce their packaging before dealing with households. "We believe that producers and retailers could be doing far more to minimise waste from products and their packaging, which households and councils are left to deal with."
Alex Johnston, environment spokesman for the Scottish Tories, said: "The idea of charging people by weight or volume is sound, but people who are already paying through their noses shouldn't be asked to pay any more.
"Also, without proper enforcement, it might result in a huge amount of rubbish being dumped in the countryside."
For the SNP, Richard Lochhead said: "I am all in favour of blue-sky thinking but clearly this would be very complex and needs a great deal more thought. The first priority must be to make it easier for people to recycle in the first place."
