Packaging: Extended Producer Responsibility

Amanda Hack Excerpts

Thursday 27th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) for securing this important debate.

I am co-chair of the APPG on food and drink, and my constituency is in the heart of the logistics corridor, so it will be no surprise to Members that I have been inside a warehouse or two and that packaging is something I talk about a lot with my businesses. I recently visited Graphic Packaging International’s site at Bardon and saw at first hand the changes it is already making to food and drink packaging to reduce its environmental impact. The company has been innovating with packaging to transition products that are harder to recycle to ones made of more sustainable materials.

The company recognises that extended producer responsibility is an important step forward in the way organisations and consumers respond to the environmental challenges of packaging, but also that it increases costs for consumers. As an international company, it also told me that the lack of consistency in approach across the UK and Europe has the potential to stifle innovation in packaging, and that the costs of EPR in the UK have been a barrier to transitioning to the more environmentally friendly packaging that is used in the European Union. It pointed out that plastic is lighter than fibrous materials, so there is a risk that the fee structure could inadvertently reduce the use of more sustainable materials.

I would be interested to hear the Minister’s thoughts on that challenge regarding the fee structure for different materials and the costs of implementing recycling. The company gave me a small example: a pack of six cans in a supermarket can be wrapped in plastic or held together by card; the card is not only more expensive to deliver but, because of its weight, more expensive under EPR. The company wants us to look at that issue and see whether it is sustainable in the long term for the better choice to be more expensive.

One of Britain’s biggest exports is waste, and British recycling has flatlined. The successful implementation of EPR has the potential to reverse that worrying trend, but we have to keep an eye on cost. There is undoubtedly room for change, and the funding opened up by the fees will allow more investment to explore recycling alternatives. I recently visited Recycleye, an organisation that is using technology and artificial intelligence to improve the recycling of Tetra Pak materials. That is a long way from the vision of the commingled materials recycling centre, and it has the potential to recycle more of the materials that are sent for sorting.

Customers want to change their habits and feel like they are doing their bit to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill. That brings me to the launch of a really positive project that was pulled together by industry, which wants to change and do the right thing. The Flexible Plastic Fund’s FlexCollect project ran a pilot in 10 local authorities—including mine, North West Leicestershire—that aimed to understand how to collect and recycle flexible packaging, from bread bags to crisp packets, confectionary packaging and food pouches. Flexible plastic packaging itself is generally a resource-efficient material: it is lightweight and can play a role in protecting food from becoming waste. It represents nearly a quarter of all UK consumer packaging, but the system for recycling it in the UK is fragmented. I would like to hear from the Minister how we are going to resolve some of the challenges related to all the materials we are using and recycling centres.

What was really interesting about the pilot is that participating households were so surprised by the amount of recycling that they could put in their bags. These kinds of projects are really useful, and the extended producer responsibility funding should be used for them, but we must also listen to the concerns of industry. Will the Minister undertake a full assessment of industry concerns about how fees for the scheme have been calculated, and of how money collected will increase recycling at the kerbside without pushing too much cost on to the businesses that deliver the packages?