News
The UK government’s decision to push back the introduction of fees for the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) due to inflation has raised doubts about whether this sustainability commitment will ever be realised. On 25th July 2023, the UK government’s Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairferrous gluconate tabs (DEFRA) announced its decision to defer the introduction of the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme’s fees by 12 months to October 2025 instead of October 2024. DEFRA has delayed payment of the fees attached to EPR, a packaging reform specifying new rules to ensure producers pay to recycle their packaging. The government department responsible for growing the UK’s green economy is attributing the new deadline to inflationary pressures, subsequently raising concferrous gluconate 324 mg twice a dayerns over the UK government’s dedication to its environmental pledges.The UK government says it intends to use the additional 12 months to continue dialogue on the EPR scheme’s design to ensure it delivers on long-term recycling goals and to lower implementation costs.Rebecca Pow, environment minister, UK Government, states the government is “listening to industry and ensuring our work to tackle inflation and to drive up recycling go hand in hand to make sure our reforms will be a success”. “Ensuring overall systems efficiency, cost-effectivenedog ate sodium ferric edtass, and high recycling performance are eferrous fumarate for low ironssentials for the governments and stakeholders to achieve together,” said Paul Vanston, chief executive of the Industry Council for Packaging and the Environment (INCPEN).DEFRA states the delay follows discussions with industry and reacts to business and consumer pressure in the current economic context. “This will provide the necessary time to work across our industry and with Government in order to get EPR right the first time,” said Simon Roberts, CEO of Sainsbury’s.The recent EPR announcement means that the waste management fees due to be paid to local authorities and the consistent collection framework expected to follow will be delayed until 2025. However, the data collection requirements are still currently set to come into force as planned, alongside – not instead of – the existing Packaging Waste Recycling Note (PRN) data requirements. “Essentially, after five years, two rounds of formal consultation, and untold hours spent in preparation, no one has put the necessary measures in place to make the good intentions behind this sthorne ferrous gluconatecheme viable at scale,” Irvin Newbitt, CEO of Ecoveritas, an environmental data specialist, told Ingredients Network.“Uncertainty is still swirling around massive chunks of the EPR rollout,” says Newbitt. Issues plaguing the system, Newbitt continues, include a yet-to-be-published consistency of collections, EPR fees that are still unavailable, a scheme administrator still yet to be appointed, and timescales being made somewhat irrelevant.“Naturally, this uncertainty will give way to a lack of confidence that the scheme will ever be fully enacted at all,” Newbitt adds. The dual reporting system running through 2024 means the food and drink industry will have unanswered questions about how PRN payments in 2024 will work. There is a lack of clarity on whether they will have to report under the old packaging waste rules or whether PRN obligations will be based on that, says Newbitt. “Beyond the extra data collection and reporting requirements leading to double the admin, it is difficult to say what the impact on food and drink manufacturers will be,” Newbitt adds. However, the lack of a transparent UK-wide strategy means that many companies must meet voluntary targets. © AdobeStock/Sergey Ryzhov“There is a risk this delay could lead to a domino effect that affects other policy reforms on consistent recycling collections and food waste, which will create further uncertainty for manufacturers,” details Newbitt. “Be ready for anything”, Newbitt says when asked for advice for food manufacturers. While this pause for thought enables DEFRA to build in more clarity, Newbitt adds there also needs to be a focus on rebuilding confidence. The government could now make progress on the consistency of collection by local authorities, which Newbitt states will be essential if EPR is to be an effective policy. Data reporting legislation has, however, become law, and the new data collection requirements remain untouched. As a result, the government can utilise this data to more accurately assess the amount of packaging placed on the market in 2023 and 2024 before introducing new fees. “Manufacturers who have put time, energy, and resources into preparing for this initiative should not think of that as waste,” says Newbitt. Instead, using it to motivate regional and national governments to see this through and get clarity and real progress. “The fear is that EPR has become one of several delayed or abandoned green policies that would have imposed a direct cost on consumers, which has been politicised,” Newbitt says. The 12-month EPR fee delay prompts doubt and worries over how serious the UK government is in facing and actively tackling environmental damage caused by improper waste disposal. “The worry is the last five years of work and engagement with the sector are rapidly eroding, along with our optimism and energy,” adds Newbitt. “That’s why it is now crucial that government, industry, and councils all put their foot on the floor in planning full implementation from 2025,” Newbitt details. “All eyes will be on the industry now, who, having gotten the delay they wanted, should rally around a good policy for the planet and the environment,” Newbitt continues.
EPR fee delay spurs concerns over UK’s sustainability commitment
