The Environment Agency is said to back a Cabinet Office scheme to charge households who fail to do their bit for recycling, according to a report in today's Times.

More virtuous households who sort garbage into categories such as glass, plastic and paper would pay nothing.

Forum Response: Environmental Services Association

Andrew Ainsworth, senior policy executive at the Environmental Services Association, told ePolitix.com: "This story from the Times stems from the rumour that the PIU will recommend variable charging for waste in its report on waste strategy later this year.

"Variable charging involves charging people on the based on the weight of the waste they produce, with some countries charging less where householders segregate recyclable materials. Variable charging is practised in some countries within the European Union and has been successful in increasing segregation at source.

"However, these schemes tend to be small-scale and may not be suitable for the UK where recycling infrastructure is immature and general awareness of waste management is poor. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to promote a system of direct charging, whereby householders pay a fee to a service provider.

"This would have the advantage of increasing the public's awareness of waste management and give them a sense of responsibility for their own actions. Furthermore, it would take the funding for municipal waste management out of the public purse. Finally, it would provide the funding mechanism to deliver the national and international recycling and recovery targets set for the UK."

Forum Response: Biffa Waste Services

Peter Jones, external affairs director at Biffa Waste Services, told ePolitix.com: "Much remains to be done through a properly conducted framework of public debate on how the justness of the 'polluter pays' principal is applied across the entire produce cycle - charging households is just one part of it.

"Having said that the current cost to householders of disposing of their waste is about £1 per week in total and suggestions that that should be doubled for worst case offenders overstate the economic cost substantially.

"Regrettably the debate is now being pushed forward without an awareness of the economic realities."