The Australian Greens acknowledge the extensive work of the Committee throughout this inquiry into the Recycling and Waste Reduction Bill 2020 and associated bills (the RWR bills), and the short timeframe in which it produced this report. We thank the Committee and the Secretariat for their work.
Introduction
At least eight million tonnes of plastic makes its way into our oceans every year, totalling 80 per cent of marine debris.
In a speech to the United Nations General Assembly on 25 September 2019, Prime Minister Scott Morrison said, 'Australia is committed to leading urgent action to combat plastic pollution choking our oceans'.
Plastic packaging, and therefore Australia's contribution to marine pollution, is not addressed directly in the RWR bills, which is ironic given the driving force behind the Prime Minister's action on recycling and the waste crisis last year was pressure from kids, including his own on a daily basis:
"There are few issues that are raised more with me by kids, than plastics in the ocean," the Prime Minister told reporters in Sydney on Tuesday. "I know mine do, on a daily basis almost".
While the Greens acknowledge the RWR bills are a step in the right direction, it is a missed opportunity if passed in their current form without substantive amendments. Given numerous studies clearly show that the majority of plastic pollution found on Australian beaches is sold and consumed locally, this legislation will go nowhere near the urgent action needed to combat Australia's contribution to the plastic pollution currently choking our oceans.
The RWR bills present a valuable opportunity for the Australian Government to not only strengthen Australia's response to the waste crisis, but to also address how we produce and consume waste, particularly plastic, in the first place.
Consultation on the Minister's priority list
While the Greens acknowledge stakeholder satisfaction with the Government's level of consultation in the development of the RWR bills, we believe an independent body should be established under legislation to ensure this consultation continues beyond the introduction of the RWR bills.
Stakeholders raised concerns in this respect and in particular, stressed the need for 'ongoing consultation with industry regarding new materials being added to the Minister's priority list'.
The RWR bills state that in preparing the Minister's priority list, the Minister 'may' consult with the list of persons and groups in subsection 67(2).
Section 67(2) should be strengthened to ensure this consultation occurs, not simply 'might' occur.
Recommendation 1
The Australian Greens recommend that an Independent Expert Advisory Group be established to provide advice to the Minister regarding products that should be included on the Minister's priority list.
Plastic packaging—priority list
Ms Rose Read of the National Waste and Recycling Industry Council (NWRIC) and Ms Gayle Sloan, Chief Executive Officer of the Waste Management and Resource Recovery Association Australia (WMRR), both support the inclusion of plastic packaging on the Minister's priority list.
The Australian Food and Grocery Council also supports this:
Senator WHISH-WILSON: … If APCO was to be accredited under this architecture, would you support a schedule to the minister's product priority list immediately listing plastic packaging as a priority product?
Mr Cosier: Identifying specific plastics is definitely something that is required. There are certain plastics— PET is highly recyclable and with a reasonable recycling rate, but there are definitely some polymers that are problematic. The industry is well aware of those and is working on those, so we would support that.
Recommendation 2
The Australian Greens recommend that plastic packaging be included as a product on the Minister's next priority list.
National Packaging Targets
The 2025 National Packaging Targets were set in September 2018 by the Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO):
(1)
100 per cent of all Australia's packaging will be reusable, recyclable or compostable by 2025 or earlier;
(2)
70 per cent of Australia's plastic packaging will be recycled or composted by 2025;
(3)
30 per cent average recycled content will be included across all packaging by 2025;
(4)
Problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic packaging will be phased out through design, innovation or introduction of alternatives.
APCO is an industry-led co-regulatory arrangement established in 1999 to reduce the environmental impacts of consumer packaging.
The Packaging Covenant is an agreement entered into by governments and the packaging industry underpinned by the National Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Measure 2011.
The 2025 National Packaging Targets were agreed to by key industry figures and endorsed by the Australian Government.
Plastic packaging, addressed by the 2025 National Packaging Targets, is a huge contributor to plastic choking our oceans.
The Greens believe that the 2025 National Packaging Targets should be mandatory and brought within a mandatory product stewardship scheme.
The Australian Food and Grocery Council supports APCO becoming an accredited product stewardship scheme under the RWR bills:
Senator WHISH-WILSON: ... If you support the government's approach, would you support APCO becoming an accredited product stewardship scheme under this act?
Ms Barden: Yes, we would, definitely.
Mr Jeff Angel of Boomerang Alliance also supports APCO being brought under a mandatory product stewardship scheme:
I think [APCO] should be brought under this bill's architecture as a mandatory scheme. I think that would solve a lot of problems for them and everybody else.
WWF-Australia in its submission recommends the transitioning of the 2025 National Packaging Targets to mandatory product stewardship:
Transitioning packaging targets to mandatory product stewardship would ensure targets are met and that industry players who are demonstrating best practice are not disadvantaged. The issue of free-riders within the current scheme is seen as a high risk and will continue to be so unless a level-playing field is set by the Government.
…a rule for used packaging be created under the Bill that includes the 2025 packaging targets outlined by APCO, allows for the establishment of multiple co-regulatory arrangements, requires annual reporting against targets and penalties for failing to meet targets, similar to how the NTCRS is structured.
The Used Packaging NEPM should be brought within the scope of the new Act - this would allow the Commonwealth to set scheme targets and outcomes (rather than industry) and allow for clear consequences and monitoring of non-compliance with the scheme requirements.
It is clear that there is support for APCO's National Packaging Targets to be brought within a mandatory product scheme. Ms Kristin Tilley, First Assistant Secretary, Environment Protection Division of the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment said:
I will address one thing you raised earlier, which is that there's nothing in this bill that addresses plastic waste in the oceans. I'd argue that the ban on the export of waste plastics is a key mechanism through which Australia is seeking to reduce the potential for plastic waste in oceans.
A waste export ban on plastic will not stop Australian consumer plastic from entering our oceans if it is not properly dealt with under a product stewardship scheme. Plastics that are problematic for recycling should be removed from the waste stream and existing ambitious circular economy packaging targets must be met if we are to have any chance of reducing our marine pollution contribution.
Plastic packaging is too risky to leave to APCO's current co-regulatory arrangement.
The Greens believe that bringing plastic packaging into a mandatory product stewardship scheme would complement the Australian Government's waste export ban on plastic.
Single-Use Plastics
The best way to reduce the impact of the single-use plastics choking our oceans and killing our marine life is not to produce or consume them in the first place. The European Parliament took the approach of simply banning the 10 most common single-use plastics found on their beaches. Australia should do the same.
While many Australian states are following the EU lead, a federal coordinated approach to banning problematic single-use plastics would be much more effective and is supported by stakeholders. Bringing APCO's National Packaging Targets into a mandatory product stewardship scheme would address these problematic single-use plastics.
WWF-Australia recommends utilising the mandatory product stewardship provisions to phase out the most problematic and unnecessary single-use plastics and says:
While we have seen encouraging progress on single-use plastics from many states and territories, the inconsistencies between regulations and the lagging of some of the most populous states calls for federal direction on single-use plastics.
One of the items that should be added to this bill, to give effect and reflect what the community wants, rather than the government at a national level falling behind where the community and business are, is to take very strong action on these single-use items and put legislation in or use the bill's provisions to enforce the packaging covenant targets—targets that, really, are only a few years off being implemented. We don't want to get to six or 12 months before the end date when we decide, 'Oh dear, the voluntary program has failed again.' Given the accumulation of plastic in the environment at an increasing level each year, we really need to get on top of this.
Recommendation 3
The Australian Greens recommend that a mandatory product stewardship scheme be established for packaging and plastics that sets targets in line with the 2025 National Packaging Targets, including the phase-out of problematic and unnecessary single-use plastics.
Review
The Product Stewardship Act 2011 legislated a review of operation of the Act after five years.
The Australian Government tabled the Final Report on this review on 8 July 2020 – nine years after the Product Stewardship Act 2011 commenced.
A review of the RWR bills is required 'no later than 10 years' after the commencement of the Act.
The Greens are of the view that a 10-year review of the RWR bills is too lengthy.
Mr Pete Shmigel, Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Council of Recycling (ACOR), supports a review of the RWR bills sooner than the proposed 10-year review.
NWRIC and WMRR both support a five-year review of the RWR bills.
Recommendation 4
The Australian Greens recommend that the RWR bills be reviewed five years after commencement.
Conclusion
Scientists estimate that in just 30 years' time, plastics will outweigh fish in our oceans.
We simply cannot let this happen. Everyone has a role to play in preventing this, particularly government, through strong action and effective regulation.
There was consistent feedback among stakeholders, from environmental groups to local government to the recycling industry, that the RWR bills do not go far enough to properly tackle our waste crisis, and in particular, Australia's contribution to plastic in the oceans.
The Committee recommended:
…that the department continue to engage with stakeholders in the implementation of the RWR bills, including on potentially constructive amendments proposed in submissions to this inquiry.
The Greens agree that the Australian Government should engage with stakeholders on constructive amendments to the RWR bills and urges the Australian Government to do this before the RWR bills are debated in the Senate.
The RWR bills in their current form are a significant missed opportunity. While we have the focus of the Prime Minister, the department, the industry, media and the public, there is no better time to do this, than now.
The Greens urge the Australian Government to agree to sensible improvements to the RWR bills that will make a real difference to our oceans.
Senator Peter Whish-Wilson
Participating Member