Australia's environment ministers have declared packaging reform urgent and named soft plastics as an initial priority, but offered no firm timetable or regulatory commitments. SPSA has welcomed the soft plastics focus, while Boomerang Alliance and WMRR have raised concerns about the lack of concrete action.
Australia’s environment ministers have agreed that packaging reform remains “an urgent and important environmental priority”, while referring substantive decisions to further work and discussion at their next meeting.
The communiqué issued following the Environment Ministers Meeting on 18 September says ministers agreed to use the Circular Economy Roadmap and its proposed actions as the basis for advancing circular economy reform.
Officials have been tasked with examining options with industry, local government and other stakeholders to strengthen packaging regulation through existing co-regulatory arrangements. They will also develop a packaging reform plan for the future under the National Competition Policy.
“This work is for discussion at the next Environment Ministers Meeting,” the communiqué says. It does not give a date for that meeting.
Ministers acknowledged that almost all single-use plastics entering Australia’s waste stream come from packaging. They agreed that packaging must be significantly reduced and designed for recycling, with design standards forming a crucial part of reform.
Ministers also agreed to explore national, state and territory harmonisation opportunities with industry under the National Competition Policy.
The communiqué identifies soft plastics as one of three initial priorities: “They agreed to explore priority national, state and territory harmonisation opportunities with industry, set out in the Roadmap for consideration under the National Competition Policy, with an initial priority on battery stewardship, solar panels and soft plastics, and report back to the next EMM.”
However, it contains no commitment to mandatory extended producer responsibility for packaging, collection or recycling targets, recycled-content mandates or reuse targets. It also provides no implementation timeline.
The outcome follows confirmation earlier this month that the Federal Government would not introduce a new Commonwealth packaging scheme during the current term of government.
Alliance calls outcome a stall
Boomerang Alliance has described the meeting outcome as a further delay to concrete action on packaging, recycling and plastic pollution.
“Despite agreeing that packaging reform remains an urgent and important environmental priority, the communiqué released after the meeting seems designed to avoid clarity and will maximise confusion,” said Boomerang Alliance director Jeff Angel.
“While it appears to reject the Federal Government’s do-nothing approach, it’s difficult to ascertain what will happen, with more reports at the next meeting, some months away. This flies in the face of the call by packagers, recyclers and environment groups for regulatory certainty.”
Angel said the Federal Government remained the key obstacle because it holds the power to implement national action.
The alliance warned that without meaningful reform, resources would continue to be discarded, recyclers would remain under threat of closure and households would continue bearing the cost of landfill disposal.
It is calling for a producer responsibility scheme with mandatory collection, recycling, recycled-content and reuse targets; rules to eliminate harmful chemicals from packaging; and an immediate producer-funded collection service for soft plastics.
Recognition is not reform
The Waste Management and Resource Recovery Association of Australia has reinforced the criticism, saying the Circular Economy Roadmap sends Australia “back around the same policy circle”.
WMRR welcomed NSW-led action on batteries and solar panels, contrasting it with the absence of deadlines and assured regulatory outcomes in the broader roadmap.
WMRR CEO Gayle Sloan pointed to NSW’s implementation of mandatory battery stewardship and its intention to finalise mandatory solar panel regulation by the end of 2026.
“That is tangible reform: establish the rules, set a deadline and create a pathway for national action,” Sloan said.
She said the roadmap largely repackaged ambitions adopted through the Australian Circular Economy Framework almost two years ago, following two years of development.
“After almost four years of frameworks and planning, Australia should be delivering – not launching another roadmap to more process,” Sloan said.
“A roadmap should tell industry who will deliver what, and by when. This one largely tells us what governments may discuss next.”
Sloan identified packaging as the clearest example of the lack of concrete action.
“Recognition is not reform. Packaging was declared a priority years ago. Australia has already reviewed, consulted, discussed and delayed,” she said.
WMRR maintains that the existing co-regulatory packaging system has failed to deliver universal participation, producer accountability or investment certainty. It says strengthening that system would not amount to the mandatory national reform that ministers agreed to progress in 2023.
The association is calling for an overarching mandatory extended producer responsibility framework, with national design requirements and clearly assigned responsibility for collection, recovery and safe end-of-life management.
It has also called on the Federal Government to release the statutory review of the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act 2020. Consultation on that review closed in February 2025, but the findings remain unreleased.
SPSA welcomes soft plastics priority
Soft Plastics Stewardship Australia has taken a more positive view, welcoming the identification of soft plastics as an initial national priority.
SPSA chief executive Barry Cosier described the outcome as a significant step forward for national recycling reform.
“This is good for Australia and our productivity. Soft plastics have long been our largest recycling market failure, with 94 per cent still going to landfill at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars each year in lost material value and landfill fees,” Cosier said.
“Naming soft plastics as a priority material and committing to stronger NEPM monitoring and enforcement will help deliver the national consistency that industry, councils and the community have been calling for.”
Asked about the contrast between SPSA’s response and the disappointment expressed by other stakeholders, Cosier said the organisation expected further engagement to begin soon.
“We expect these conversations to happen in the days and weeks ahead. For now, we are encouraged that EMM recognises the particular concerns of this material.”
The communiqué does not expressly name the Used Packaging Materials National Environment Protection Measure, but SPSA said it understood the decision would strengthen its monitoring and enforcement.
SPSA linked the outcome to its recently released economic analysis, which found that nationally aligned packaging design, labelling and recycling rules could deliver between $115 million and $277 million in annual productivity gains and stimulate between $1.6 billion and $2.6 billion in capital investment.
The stewardship organisation said it would work with governments and industry to turn the meeting commitments into harmonised action supporting the circular economy and domestic manufacturing.
Further responses are expected from packaging manufacturers, brand owners, recyclers and industry associations. PKN will continue to report on the reaction and the implications of the meeting outcome.
