Select committee: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
Conclusion 5
Third Report - The price of plastic: ending the toll of plastic waste
Published 7 Nov 2022
Paragraph 34
Addressed to Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Plastic waste All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
The introduction of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging is a welcome reform that has the potential to drive progress towards a more sustainable plastics economy. However, the lack of information about the EPR fee scheme and the two-year delay in implementation mean that achieving meaningful change in packaging design in the short term is unlikely. Despite the former Minister’s assurances that the scheme will be fully operational by 2024, we cannot see how that can be the case if the modulated fees that underpin the scheme will not fully be in 58 The price of plastic: ending the toll of plastic waste place until 2025. To make progress towards 2025 targets, the delivery of EPR needs to be expediated and information for businesses provided well in advance to give them time to adapt.
From: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Third Report - The price of plastic: ending the toll of plastic waste (HC 22), paragraph 34, 7 November 2022
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 27 January 2023 (deadline 7 January 2023).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government agrees with the Committee on the importance of the waste hierarchy and on reuse, but disagrees with several recommendations, including dropping the qualifier "avoidable" from the 2042 plastic waste target and a ban on all plastic waste exports.
- It agrees that more use of reusable packaging is desirable and intends to "come forward with our proposals in 2024" on measures such as targets, obligations and whether there is a role for modulating fees.
- It disagrees with an exit strategy for the Packaging Waste Recovery Note system within a year of EPR starting, because it wants "to make sure we put the right measures in place at the right time".
- It disagrees with modulating the Plastic Packaging Tax, saying the 30% recycled content threshold is "ambitious", and keeps the rate and threshold "under review". Changes are a matter for Treasury Ministers.
- It disagrees with a ban on all plastic waste exports, expecting "legitimate exports to continue", and has committed to banning exports of plastic waste to non-OECD countries.