The path to smarter policy

A change to the method of government consultation so that packaging policy can be better formulated; well founded ‘end of life’ policy; and improved perceptions of the plastics industry: Is this a wish list or the UK plastics industry manifesto?

I met up with Barry just weeks before May’s UK General Election and right after he had ‘door-stepped’ civil servants at Westminster to deliver an industry response to a Government consultation concerning future targets for packaging recycling.

Barry has only just resigned his directorship at Britton Group, one of the UK’s largest films and packaging suppliers and exporters. He thinks this still-live link with industry will help support and steer the fight by plastics to shake off persistent challenges to what the sector believes are provable environmental claims.

His time in office kicked off with an ‘unprecedented’ three government consultations landing on his desk, on landfill bans, recycling targets and climate change agreements, each calling for actions to prevent further grief to the industry.

In addition came the latest Round Two agreement of Courtauld requiring the retail supply chain to square up to a new policy approach based on carbon impact rather than weight.

The latest proposal could lead to risky packaging decisions liable to increase food waste, which has a much higher carbon impact than the packaging. At present, multilayer films protect meat from deterioration and have a carbon impact as little as one fiftieth of the meat it protects, Barry argues.

Courtauld 2 is set to run for a limited time of two years. “It’s half-baked, and the retail chain is not at all in favour of it,” says Barry. “We need to do things a little smarter. How do you analyse all those SKUs for carbon? Although I acknowledge it’s a step in the right direction, it needs robust challenging because industry needs some way to plan long-term.

He continues: “PAFA welcomes the resource efficiency approach. But we look forward to total life cycle analysis, where we win every time.”

LCA is the only way to make fair comparisons, he says, but adds that LCA tools must be developed with a wide industry consensus.

Concerned that public money is being wasted in policymaking, he believes that instead of hiring expensive consultants, government should talk direct to industry.

On industry red tape, he says: “The burden of regulation is supposed to have eased, but I struggle to find members agreeing.

“Take REACH: unlike any other member country, the UK has imposed the principle of unlimited fines. I’m hoping something can be done about that.”

He wants to see greater support for economic growth. “There’s not enough creative response to the need to create income for the country. Are costly, aspirational environmental targets right and proper when the country is in its fragile economic state? We have suggested a working group - an elected committee representing the plastics logistics chain - to work on some solutions.”

The current Advisory Committee on Packaging (ACP) is composed of hand-picked retailers, packer fillers and industry members, but it is ‘common sense’ that any policy must be formulated with the widest possible consultation among those it will affect.

“I’ll be very disappointed if the working group proposal is not taken on board. The alternative is to be totally open to changing policy after it has been put out to consultation.”

PAFA represents plastics with different raw material origins, but is disturbed by the clamour from disputing factions within the ‘degradables’ sector, which has confused end users, not least retailers and brand owners.

“Government prefers the waste hierarchy, ¬‘reduce, reuse, recycle’. I feel at present there’s little room in UK policy for degradable materials from which you can’t recapture something - energy or compost. And materials must not disrupt the recycling chain for non-bio or degradable materials,” he affirms.

“As a result of lobbying, the UK is looking more closely at bio-materials and energy from waste. With oxy-degradables, it is a highly charged and emotional area, and retailers have moved away from it. And we need to close the chapter by working together and aiming to make a joint industry-government decision, involving all in the process.

“I believe not enough work has been done, and there’s not enough authoritative information to deal with end of life questions. We have to be very careful: good policy is held back, pending knowledge. It’s a matter of education, and technology is coming on all the time..”