Industry and government in Britain are opposing confidential plans drawn
up by the European Commission to make drastic cuts in the amounts of packaging
waste generated over the next decade. David Pearce, special adviser to the
Department of the Environment, says that plans for a packaging tax and other
tough measures put the Commission in ‘cloud cuckoo-land’.
The proposals are contained in a draft directive on packaging, drawn
up in July. Later this month the Commission will publish a final version
which it hopes member states will adopt by the end of the year.
The directive provides for a 5 per cent tax on the value of most packaging,
which will raise an estimated 30 to 40 billion Ecus (Pounds sterling 21
to £28 billion) a year. Only those items which carry a deposit, and
so can be returned for recycling or reuse, will avoid the tax. Under the
proposals the money will be used to pay for recyling. In five years’ time,
the plan says 40 per cent of packaging must be recycled and 60 per cent
will have to be ‘recovered’ – a term which includes incineration to extract
energy. Also, manufacturers will have to list the constituents of any item
of packaging that cannot be reused.
In 1990, 154 kilograms of packaging was produced for every person in
the Community. The Commission wants the amount of packaging returned to
this level within 10 years. By this time it also says that 90 per cent of
used packaging will have to be recovered. Items which are not recyclable,
refillable or recoverable will be banned, as will packaging that goes beyond
the minimum needed for safety and ‘product acceptance’ by consumers.
The July draft is far tougher than earlier versions and represents a
swing towards German proposals. If they are agreed by member states, the
measures will be binding. But Pearce fears that the new proposals are unworkable
and will be too expensive.
‘Recovering 90 per cent of packaging is not achievable. It is nonsense,’
says Pearce. ‘They are stating an environmental objective regardless of
costs. There has been no discussion of the costs to industry or consumers.’
The Department of Trade and Industry, which is responsible for negotiating
with the Commission, opposes recovery targets, a fixed limit on packaging
and ‘burdensome’ labelling requirements.
Pearce says Continental countries want to reduce packaging sharply because
they face a shortage of landfill sites. Germany has already introduced packaging
legislation, including a blue spot for consumers to look for on environmentally
friendly containers. Britain, by contrast, has plenty of landfill sites
and less need to cut down on packaging, says Pearce.
Jim McDermott, a spokesman for the Institute of Packaging, says British
industry finds the Commission’s proposals unacceptable. He thinks recovering
25 to 50 per cent is the maximum possible. The European Packaging Association
has backed plans for the 5 per cent tax on packaging. But McDermott is not
convinced: ‘Like road tax, it will disappear into the Treasury,’ he says.
The Commission’s proposals show one notable victory for Britain’s DTI.
Incinerating waste packaging to produce energy will count towards recovery
targets – a measure backed by the DTI.
But Friends of the Earth argues strongly against this move. Penny Walker
of FoE says that if targets do not favour materials recovery over energy
recovery, authorities will incinerate as much as they can and avoid proper