Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—In respect of the Recycling and Waste Reduction Bill 2020, I move Greens amendments (1) to (4) on sheet 1031 revised together:

(1) Clause 10, page 9 (after line 13), after the definition of intellectual property rights, insert:

labelled plastic: see subsection 94Q(1).

(2) Clause 66, page 67 (after line 13), after the paragraph beginning "These requirements might", insert:

There are also specific requirements as part of the mandatory product stewardship regime in relation to labelling the packaging of certain plastic products, to alert consumers to the potential harm of the product to the environment or other prescribed matters.

(3) Page 100 (after line 16), after Part 5, insert:

Part 5C—Mandatory product stewardship—packaging of labelled plastics

94Q Packaging of labelled plastics

(1) This section applies in relation to a product (a labelled plastic) that is made of, or contains, plastic if:

(a) the product is a sanitary product, within the meaning prescribed by the rules; or

(b) the product is a wet wipe, within the meaning prescribed by the rules; or

(c) the product is a balloon; or

(d) the product is a filter tip (within the meaning of the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011) of a cigarette; or

(e) the product is specified in rules made for the purposes of this paragraph.

(2) On and after 1 January 2022, the packaging of a labelled plastic must state, in a prominent location on the packaging:

(a) that the product is harmful to the environment if the product is released or incorrectly disposed of; and

(b) any other matter specified in rules made for the purposes of this paragraph.

(3) For the purposes of this Part, packaging includes:

(a) a container, wrapper, confining band or other thing in which a good is packed, or 2 or more goods are packed; and

(b) anything around which a good is wound or wrapped, or 2 or more goods are wound or wrapped; and

(c) a container that is designed to contain a liquid for human consumption (whether for the purposes of transporting or storing the liquid, or for the use or consumption of the liquid).

94R Packaging of labelled plastics—constitutional corporations

(1) A person contravenes this subsection if:

(a) the person is a constitutional corporation; and

(b) the person distributes a labelled plastic for commercial purposes; and

(c) the packaging of the labelled plastic does not comply with subsection 94Q(2).

Fault -based offence

(2) A person commits an offence if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Penalty: 600 penalty units.

Strict liability

(3) A person commits an offence of strict liability if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Penalty: 300 penalty units.

Civil penalty provision

(4) A person is liable to a civil penalty if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Civil penalty: 1,200 penalty units.

94S Packaging of labelled plastics—persons other than constitutional corporations

(1) A person contravenes this subsection if:

(a) the person distributes a labelled plastic:

(i) in the course of, or for the purposes of, constitutional trade or commerce; or

(ii) in a Territory for commercial purposes; or

(iii) on behalf of a constitutional corporation for commercial purposes; or

(iv) for the purposes of supplying goods to a constitutional corporation; and

(b) the packaging of the labelled plastic does not comply with subsection 94Q(2).

Fault -based offence

(2) A person commits an offence if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Penalty: Imprisonment for 2 years or 120 penalty units, or both.

Strict liability

(3) A person commits an offence of strict liability if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Penalty: 60 penalty units.

Civil penalty provision

(4) A person is liable to a civil penalty if the person contravenes subsection (1).

Civil penalty: 240 penalty units.

(4) Clause 102, page 110 (after line 6), after paragraph (1)(q), insert:

(qg) subsection 94R(3);

(qh) subsection 94S(3);

These amendments are essentially on stronger labelling. These amendments propose labelling requirements for certain plastic products to alert consumers to the potential harm of the product to the environment. These are required by January 2022—so in a couple of years time. The packaging of the following products must state that the product is harmful to the environment if released or incorrectly disposed of: sanitary products, wet wipes, balloons and cigarette filters.

In relation to the single-use plastics ban, the biggest criticism I got tonight for putting up the ban on single-use plastics—the amendments which, sadly, were voted down—was that it didn't go anywhere near far enough. This was from people that have been campaigning in this area for decades. For example, they wanted a ban on single-use plastics to include helium balloons. They wanted cigarette filters banned. For those people who don't know, cigarette filters are plastic. If you put them in water and you leave them for a few months and come back, you'll see the water is full of plastic filaments. Of course, cigarette butts are the most common item that we find on our beaches in Australia. They make their way into the water. It doesn't take them long to decompose, and then you have millions, if not billions, of pieces of microplastic in the ocean from cigarette filters.

Filters are something we would have loved to have banned, but we knew that was going to be very problematic. We wanted to stick to items that had readily available alternatives that people could use; that doesn't disadvantage business. But we did want to at least have stronger labelling that lets consumers know that when they buy balloons or cigarettes, these things, if not disposed of properly, will be extremely harmful in the ocean. While we've worked on balloon releases—we know that it's becoming very politically incorrect to release balloons at public events. Sadly, there are still balloons being released at some events, but most people understand now that they go straight into the ocean. Every balloon you saw in the old days at the MCG was going straight into Port Phillip Bay or even further in the ocean. At least we've cracked down on that.

This is the best we can do without going too far. That's not something you'd normally hear from me or from the Greens, but this is our version of compromising. I suppose what I'm saying to the Senate is: it's not a big deal but it's important, so please support it.