Skip navigation


The Riigikogu rejected the Bill on Amendments to the Waste Act (688 SE), initiated by Aivar Kokk, Andrus Saare, Erki Nool, Peeter Laurson and Toomas Tõniste, which would have introduced into the Act the sentence to the effect that the Consumer Protection Board exercises supervision over the provision of the waste transportation service. Nool who made a report on the Bill at the sitting said that the amendment of the Act is due to the need to set down clearly that, upon the provision of organised transportation of waste, consumers have the right to turn to the Consumer Protection Board to protect their rights.

“Numerous cases are known where waste carriers have damaged the rights of consumers. So for example waste carriers have established unlawful fee rates which damage consumer rights for additional services,” Nool said. “Neither the Waste Act nor the Consumer Protection Act give an unambiguous answer to the question of whether the handling of complaints relating to the provision of the waste transportation service falls within the competence of the Consumer Protection Board.”

Tõnis Kõiv made a report on behalf of the Environment Committee who supported the rejection of the Bill. He noted that the Consumer Protection Board already has the right to exercise supervision with regard to waste transportation service contracts where they concern specific consumers.

“That is, to extend the authority of the Consumer Protection Board so widely and indefinitely, according to the Bill, would actually mean a change of the definition of the consumer in the Consumer Protection Act and a revision of the Consumer Protection Act. Eventually, an apartment association, an enterprise, that is, a legal person would also have to be considered a consumer, and that would obviously be a too big and unnecessary change,” Kõiv added. He said that the Government had not supported the amendment of the Waste Act in such a form. The Government had found that so general a reference to the supervision exercised by the consumer protection would not contribute to the clarity of the situation or increase legal clarity in standing for the interests of consumers.

55 members of the Riigikogu voted in favour of the motion to reject the Bill made by the Environment Committee.

The Riigikogu passed with 84 votes in favour the Resolution of the Riigikogu “Amendment of the Resolution of the Riigikogu “Formation of the State Budget Control Select Committee”” (702 OE), submitted by the Estonian Reform Party Faction, which provides for the appointment of Andre Sepp as an alternative member of the Select Committee instead of Aivar Sõerd.

The verbatim record of the sitting (in Estonian)