Close×

The Boomerang Alliance says it has cautiously welcomed the progress report released at the recent National Soft Plastics Summit, held last week in Canberra.

“The plans developed by the Australian Food & Grocery Council (AFGC) are beginning to open the doors to a potential scheme for producer responsibility.  An important advance are the promising results of trials using local government kerbside collections. However, a lot more will need to be put in place, if the soft plastics problem is to be solved,’’ said Jeff Angel, director of the alliance of 55 groups.

Angel said that manufacturers taking responsibility for recovery costs is an essential principle of a product stewardship scheme. “The next step is to recognise that manufacturer responsibility must be extended to covering the costs of packaging, through its entire lifecycle,’’ he added.

He also said that the container refund schemes across Australia are successful examples where producers are responsible for the full costs associated with the recovery of their products.

“Currently, virtually all of the estimated 150,000 tonnes of household soft plastic waste generated in Australia is going to landfill, because there is no collection for recycling. Putting an effective collection and reprocessing service in place with mandatory targets for reduction, reuse, recycling and alternative materials, is urgently needed,’’ concluded Angel.

Food & Drink Business

A national network for young grape and wine professionals has been launched, set to foster the next generation of winemakers, viticulturists, cellar door staff, wine judges and other roles in Australia’s wine sector.

A new bill was introduced to Parliament on 19 November, which offers a framework for regulating the sale or importation of organic goods in Australia, and stronger opportunities for exporting organic products.

The Senate Economics Committee has rejected the Food Donations Bill that proposed a tax offset for companies donating excess food to food relief agencies rather than dumping it. While the bill had the potential to deliver the equivalent of 100 million meals to food relief organisations, the committee said it had “serious concerns” including the bill’s “generous” tax concessions. Food relief agencies and social welfare organisations have questioned the committee’s decision to reject the bill outright rather than make recommendations for amendments.