ENVIRONMENTAL compliance data specialist Ecoveritas has hailed Defra’s decision to defer Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging fees until October 2025 as ‘unfortunate but necessary’ due to a lack of clarity on costs for businesses.
Ecoveritas said the announcement to delay by a year ‘confirms what many suspected would be the case’, and pushes back the main part of EPR until after the 2024 election, potentially adding more delays.
“We’re yet to come across anyone who disagrees with the direction of travel,” said head of sustainability & consulting, Kathy Illingworth. “But, for an ambitious reform, it has long been apparent that there were too many missing puzzle pieces and far too many detractors before its launch.
“It’s bittersweet. This pause for thought should allow Defra to build in more clarity, but there is certainly a job to be done to rebuild confidence. At the same time, 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.
“Perhaps the government can now make progress on the consistency of collection by local authorities, which will be essential if EPR is to be the effective policy we know it can be. What is clear is that there were major question marks over the scheme’s readiness and a real lack of confidence. We must now prioritise agreeing and setting the fees this summer so that affected companies can plan for these additional costs.
“Despite the further delay and the risk that the scheme’s implementation is lost in the run-up to the election, Ecoveritas stands ready to work with government and industry to design an EPR scheme that delivers a high level of recycling and effectively tackles packaging waste.”
Ecoveritas added that, in the interim, the public will continue to bear the cost of packaging recycling and disposal, with investment in recycling infrastructure ‘likely harder’ due to a loss of confidence in the legislative framework.
Illingworth said that failure to achieve a UK-wide reform of waste and recycling services within a reasonable timescale would be a case study of ‘back-sliding, incompetence, and political amnesia’.
“EPR has been five years in the making, and the level of innovation and the pace of change from packaging manufacturers is impressive,” she claimed. “Many positive steps have already been taken. Many packaging manufacturers will have put a lot of thought into designing something that will hit EPR requirements, particularly where different players in the packaging chain have different responsibilities.
“Our focus is helping businesses get their data ready. Businesses have already put time, energy, and resources into preparing. We now must ensure it’s realistic and give producers all the information they need – and resist continuously changing it.”
OPRL (On-Pack Recycling Label) is advising businesses to use this extra time wisely to avoid unnecessary EPR costs.
Margaret Bates, MD at OPRL, said the delay offers an opportunity for those ready to use the time constructively.
“Those which prepare now will benefit from lower fee costs and show a strong brand response,” she added. “EPR is designed to drive recyclability and all the associated benefits. It is spreading across the globe and will affect large businesses across their portfolio.
“For the UK it is important to recognise it as direction of travel, rather than a stand-alone piece of legislation. Recent OPRL research showed that, despite the cost of living crisis, consumers are behind recycling – 81% agreed that recycling is very important. With or without EPR, consumers are likely to call for greater recyclability.”
In the consumer survey, OPRL said the environment was the number one prompted motivation behind recycling. The organisation, which manages the only label currently compliant with EPR rules, advises businesses to begin as soon as possible to ensure that packaging is recyclable and that it has the correct label on.
Bates added, “Businesses need to assess whether packaging items are recyclable and arrange new labelling. For some, this will be a significant task, so it is crucial that work starts well before the deadline.
“The key message is to prepare, prepare, prepare! The risks associated with being ready – and finding legislation delayed still further – are minor when compared with the risks of arriving at EPR unprepared.”
Steve Gough, CEO at compliance scheme Valpak, said that stakeholders face ‘tough choices’ in the current economic climate.
“With consumers under significant pressure from the cost-of-living crisis, both government and business are struggling to balance budgets against a commitment to progress with environmental improvements,” he added. “Defra today said that EPR charges would be delayed until 2025, with charges under the current PRN regulations to carry on into 2024. This offers a great opportunity to effectively have a dry run of the EPR data collection process, so that targets for 2025 EPR can be set in the most appropriate manner.
“EPR calls for data to be collected and prepared in a new format, and those which have not prepared will struggle to meet deadlines at short notice. Valpak staff are on hand to support members with any questions and issues they have with collecting data. This extended data collection requirement and the delay in the EPR charges gives opportunities for businesses to analyse and make changes ahead of the increased costs coming in 2025.
“Companies in a number of sectors have been facing uncertainty over whether they need to register, particularly converters of packaging, franchisees and those in hospitality. But under the new delay they will remain obligated under the previous system until the end of 2024.”
