Authorised IMDS & CDX Training & Consulting partner for
Australia’s Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water (DCCEEW) published the Reform of Packaging Regulation Consultation Paper on September 27, 2024. Three alternatives for changing Australia’s packaging laws are presented in this document. Comments are accepted through October 28, 2024.
Australia’s National Environment Protection (Used Packaging Materials) Measure 2011 (UPM NEPM) established a national co-regulatory framework for packaging. There are two primary methods in which businesses with an annual turnover of $5 million or more that manufacture, sell, or otherwise handle packaging or packaged goods in Australia must satisfy their obligations:
Joining the Australian Packaging Covenant Organization (APCO) and signing the Australian Packaging Covenant (the Covenant)
reporting under the UPM NEPM to the state or territorial government agency. The UPM NEPM is reflected in laws and/or regulations in every state and territory.
Nonetheless, issues have been brought up regarding how well the current system manages packaging’s environmental effects and doesn’t offer a strong foundation for industry compliance.
Proposed Options for Reform
- Supporting co-regulatory arrangement administration
This alternative seeks to improve the present system by enforcing stricter laws and implementing education initiatives to reduce the number of enterprises that neglect their packaging-related obligations. In order to assist industry in achieving the Covenant’s objectives, it highlights APCO’s 2030 Strategic Plan. Starting in 2027, Australia will continue to establish membership prices and introduce eco-modulated fees, despite the fact that financing arrangements are intact.
- Mandatory national packaging regulations
Under this approach, obligatory requirements for regulated companies would replace the current co-regulatory structure. These organizations would have to register with the government and abide by all regulations, which would include prohibiting the use of hazardous materials and chemicals, gradually outlawing packaging to require a minimum level of recyclability, and putting minimum recycled content thresholds in place. To pay for administrative costs, the government may also levy cost recovery fees.
- A packaging-related extended producer responsibility (EPR) program
This alternative suggests a nationwide EPR program with requirements for regulated companies and industry-level results. Like Option 2, it would need adherence to a number of laws; however, progressive restrictions would be replaced with eco-modulated levies depending on recyclable design. The objective of this strategy is to provide variable fees for packaging that is put on the market, which might lead to an increase in government financing for programs that support the circular packaging economy.