IBAL responds to litter report criticism

IRISH Businesses Against Litter (IBAL) has reacted
angrily to accusations that it is discouraging tourism by presenting a

“misleading and untrue

? account of the city’s rubbish problem.

IBAL was forced to defend its methods and credibility
after its latest survey – in which Dublin city ranked 50th most littered area
out of 53 surveyed – sparked anger and controversy.

While the survey identified many areas in Dublin such
as Grafton Street, O’Connell Street and George’s Quay that were fresh and
clean, other areas were described as being littered and poorly presented.

“The really poor sites in Dublin city were in very
specific areas – a couple of sites close to Iveagh Market and several sites
around Christchurch,

? IBAL’s report stated.

“What all of these sites have in common is an air of
neglect and abuse – they didn’t get this way overnight.

?

The Dublin City Business Improvement District (BID)
hit back at IBAL’s findings which it described as

“deeply misleading

? and said
it could jeopardise tourism revenues and jobs.

“Because of dramatic media grabbing statements like
this, a tourist considering visiting Dublin could be misled into believing that
Dublin city is

‘dirty’ when this is not the case,

? stated Richard Guiney, chief
executive of Dublin City BID.

“The majority of Dublin’s main tourist areas are
recorded as clean.

“While there are areas outside the Business
Improvement District area which are regarded as unclean, we note again that
these are mainly in private or residential areas, for example, in basements
where cleaning organisations cannot access.

“It’s also important to point out that these surveys
are a snapshot of a point in time and are not representative of the true
situation on the streets.

?

Mr Guiney added:

“The methodologies being employed in
this survey do not meet industry standards and important policy decisions
should not be based on such amateur misinformation.

?

Dublin City BID surveys 115 streets in the city centre
on a daily basis for litter and last year it responded to 5,100 calls from
businesses to remove unsightly waste.

Clontarf ward councillor Naoise � Muirí (FG) has
called on IBAL to make its methodologies known, especially as it is effectively
funded by the taxpayer through An Taisce.

“As chairperson of Dublin City Council’s Environment
Strategic Policy Committee, I am very aware of Dublin’s dependency on tourism,
and to that end am always anxious to ensure that negative commentary on
littering in the city is properly grounded,

? said Cllr Ã? Muirí.

“Given that IBAL makes use of taxpayer-funded An
Taisce personnel in litter surveying, it is not good enough that they refuse to
be accountable for their methodology.

?

North inner city ward councillor Nial Ring (Ind) also
slammed the IBAl report. He said labelling the city as

“littered

? and
describing the north inner city was a

“litter blackspot

? was inaccurate,
incorrect and damaging.

“Basically IBAL includes residential areas,
classifying them as Dublin City Centre, and by doing this ignores the
tremendous work being done by Dublin City Council and Dublin City BID in
keeping our streets clean,

? he stated.

Reacting to the criticism, IBAL said it had no
involvement with the surveying of towns and cities and that it commissions An
Taisce which carries out the surveys in accordance with internationally
accepted standards.

“IBAL refutes the suggestion that the survey of Dublin
city is misleading,

? a spokesperson for IBAL told Northside People.

“For several years we have made it quite clear that
the high footfall tourist areas of the city such as Grafton Street are

‘Clean
to European Norms’. Our issue is with the areas of the city centre where
residents of Dublin live such as Sheriff Street and Smithfield.

“These have been found to be littered. Have the
residents of Dublin not the same right to a litter free environment as its
visitors?

?