Paul Little: A complete waste of... well, everything

All Aucklanders will have to hand over $67 for food-scrap refuse, no matter how much or how little waste they produce. Photo / 123RF

Nine Auckland councillors - just short of a majority - have written to the mayor saying they're not very happy with him, mainly for buying $900,000 worth of report on the feasibility of a downtown stadium and not telling them about it.

This probably wasn't the most confidence- or trust-inspiring move on his part, although you can understand him wanting to keep it quiet. Especially when the report came to the conclusion that we definitely do need another report. What it couldn't work out was whether or not a stadium was worth having.

Perhaps Phil Goff just forgot about the report. This sort of memory lapse can occur in any relationship but the truth will usually come to light - for instance, when the credit card statement comes in.

And to be fair, just shy of seven figures seems to be the going rate for this sort of study. Which leads us to one definite conclusion - we should all encourage our kids to get on to this report-writing lark.

However, I'm not at all sure that a letter of no confidence is the best way to heal going forward. I am sure that as Auckland's property values remain stratospheric and we enjoy rates levies to match, Aucklanders will become more interested in what those rates are used to buy.

Which may be why hearings on a waste-management plan for the city received 6579 submissions and came to the conclusion - supported by 70 per cent of residents surveyed - that we all need another rubbish bin.

Unsurprisingly, given its inability to act in a concerted fashion, Auckland has a variety of waste-disposal systems and payment methods.

The new bin, to be introduced around the region in the next couple of years, will be for food scraps. Which I had no idea anyone needed, but then I have a compost bin and two dogs.

Other residents have environmentally dodgy kitchen-sink waste-disposal units. Still others are eating more of their meals away from home, generating less food waste. But we are all going to pay for the food-scrap bins.

There will be a one-size-fits-all system. As reported in the Herald this week: "The council plans to charge all households $67 a year for food-scrap collections and eventually shift the weekly general waste-bin collections to fortnightly on a pay-as-you-throw system."

This is the user pays system - more correctly known as the user-pays-more-gets-less-service system. If this all goes according to plan, that stadium report will be paid for in no time.

We all have to hand over the $67, no matter how much or how little food waste we produce.

According to councillor Penny Hulse, it was not practical to provide an opt-out option.

Which is surprising in an age of constant computer surveillance and social media that can make me vote a certain way and parking apps that can tell where my car is parked and for how long and whether I've paid for it.

Councils can remember our addresses for all sorts of other things; this wouldn't seem too much of a stretch.

Meanwhile, in other exciting waste-disposal news, Papakura is getting wheelie bins. "Papakura has been waiting a long time to move from orange rubbish bags to a wheelie-bin service," said ward councillor Daniel Newman.

So - not a lot of entertainment options out in Papakura, then. "This is about ... helping families to minimise their waste even more."

Well, no it won't. Nor will the food-scrap bins.

All waste has to go somewhere.

The only way to minimise waste is to stop producing it.

To stop buying products with twice their own volume of packaging and padding, to tell your supermarket you don't want to see individually wrapped anythings, and stop buying food that goes uneaten.