Leila Taheri’s article is interesting, and she is right, up to a point (I lead a litter-picking group, but I will always defend litterers. This is why, 3 April). There is certainly far too much single-use rubbish created, and manufacturers should be incentivised to produce less. Since they are motivated to seek the cheapest option (eg disposable versus returnable bottles), it is up to the government to create economic rules that favour “reduce, reuse, recycle”.
It should also review how disposal is funded. Costs are incurred when following the proper disposal route, and these can be considerable. This provides an incentive to fly-tip, and discourages the provision of bins (the owner/operator has to pay).
Litter clearing is the other side of the coin. Public bodies, both local and national, need to give greater priority to this – look at the state of roadsides. The money for this has to come from somewhere and, in principle, should be raised when items are made and sold.
Where I disagree with the author is in exculpating litterers. The decision to drop litter, whatever one’s circumstances, is a personal choice; littering is not confined to those who are hard-up. The common characteristic of wilful litterers, rich or poor, is selfishness – “my convenience, grievance or whatever is all that matters”. However, I agree that merely ranting against litter is unproductive, and if one doesn’t like to see it, then one should get out there and help pick it up (I do). More power to Taheri for doing that.
Peter Janes
West Harptree, Somerset
• I read with interest Leila Taheri’s article about how much to blame those who litter. I help local litter volunteers and the amount of rubbish chucked out of car windows into the hedges and verges along my local lane is truly atrocious. The vast majority of the rubbish is made up of discarded glass and plastic bottles, and aluminium cans.
When I lived in Germany, I never saw this kind of litter anywhere, and there was a good, simple reason. Germany has had an excellent deposit return scheme (DRS) and recycling system for over 25 years. All supermarkets have machines that take glass and plastic bottles and aluminium cans in return for a voucher that you redeem at the till. Even if somebody throws one of these items into a hedge, it wouldn’t be there for long because every kid knows it’s worth 25 cents.
Environmental groups in Britain campaigned hard for two decades for something similar here, but the current government dragged its feet because it is in the pocket of the big drinks companies and supermarkets. In 2019, it finally announced that a DRS would go ahead; it then took two years for a consultation, then another two years to hear the outcome. Now, we hear that it won’t be introduced until after the next election – and it won’t even include glass bottles.
All those who voted for the present government should admit their share of blame for the dismal state of our country.
Edmund Wood
Gillingham, Dorset
• I organise our village litter pick and we are invariably disheartened by the amount of rubbish we find and do get angry about it, so when I read Leila Taheri’s article, I thought it was the Guardian’s April fool’s joke two days late. So when I see a delivery bloke chucking his can out of his van window I shouldn’t think him a lazy, inconsiderate slob, he is just feeling “alienated, disconnected and excluded”.
Colin McRae
Great Dunmow, Essex
• Leila Taheri’s article was infuriating. How patronising to suggest that people shouldn’t be expected to use a bin because of “society”. Litterers disgrace themselves and this planet, and they are a very, very long way down my list of people to feel sorry for. I’m sure the heron that choked to death would agree.
Helen Clutton
Bristol
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
