A cross-sector open letter is urging national leaders to agree on a pathway for regulated producer responsibility schemes at the September Environment Ministers Meeting.
The open letter, coordinated by One Planet Consulting and supported by Boomerang Alliance and other industry associations, has called on Australian governments to use the Environment Ministers Meeting on 18 September to confirm key principles and a national pathway for regulated Extended Producer Responsibility schemes.
The letter is addressed to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese; Treasurer Jim Chalmers; Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Science Tim Ayres; Environment and Water Minister Murray Watt; and state and territory environment ministers.
It asks governments to pursue nationally regulated EPR schemes under the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act 2020, arguing that existing voluntary arrangements leave significant gaps in responsibility, funding and compliance.
The letter remains open to further signatures. Organisational signatories shown in the version supplied to PKN include Australian Industry Group, Australian Furniture Association, Australian Furnishing Industry Stewardship Council, Charitable Reuse Australia, GECA, Municipal Association of Victoria, PREP Design, Surfers for Climate, Boomerang Alliance, CEMAC Technologies, Global GreenTag and One Planet Consulting.
Together, the signatories span manufacturing, retail, recycling, stewardship, local government, product certification and environmental advocacy. They describe themselves as representing thousands of businesses, employers and communities across Australia.
The letter is separate from the Boomerang Alliance’s longstanding public campaign focused specifically on producer responsibility for plastic packaging, which has attracted more than 10,000 signatures.
EPR across priority products
While the letter has direct relevance for packaging, its scope is broader. It calls for regulated producer responsibility across priority product categories, including packaging, plastics, batteries, mattresses, tyres, flooring, clothing and solar photovoltaic products.
Its central argument is that Australia should adopt the type of regulated EPR framework already operating in more than 80 countries.
The signatories contend that such schemes can allocate responsibility more equitably, reduce free riding and provide long-term funding for collection, reuse, repair, recycling and remanufacturing.
“Australia is an outlier and improvements are only feasible with regulated EPR,” the letter states.
It also disputes concerns that mandatory EPR would necessarily increase household costs, arguing that Australia’s present system already shifts substantial costs onto governments, councils, ratepayers and taxpayers.
The position builds on research by One Planet Consulting, which examined more than 20 international EPR systems and identified nationally coordinated regulation, producer registries, enforcement against free riders and not-for-profit producer responsibility organisations as features of effective models.
Eight actions proposed
The letter sets out eight actions that it wants reflected in the September Environment Ministers Meeting communiqué.
-
Use existing powers. The Federal Government is called on to use its authority under the Recycling and Waste Reduction Act to establish mandatory national EPR schemes for priority products.
-
Strengthen national governance. The letter identifies the National EPA as the appropriate regulator for EPR schemes, producer responsibility organisations and obligated producers. It says the agency could enforce compliance, reduce free riding and streamline reporting.
-
Progress national implementation. The signatories support advancing the National Intergovernmental Agreement while regulations are drafted, with EPR schemes potentially beginning from mid-2027. They argue that this would reduce duplication, fragmentation and costs across jurisdictions.
-
Commit to implementation. The Federal Government is urged to begin drafting mandatory producer responsibility regulations. The accompanying media release says impact statements and tenders should be initiated within the next three to six months to establish national schemes.
-
Adopt proven models. The letter advocates regulated, industry-led, not-for-profit producer responsibility organisations. These organisations would administer eco-modulated fees designed to encourage improved product and packaging design, reuse, recycling and repair.
-
Support priority sectors. The formal letter calls for urgent announcements to protect stewardship schemes, infrastructure and investment. The accompanying media release goes further, seeking bridging finance until regulation takes effect to prevent further REDcycle 2.0-type closures across schemes, supply chains and businesses.
-
Establish a regulatory roadmap. A roadmap covering the next six to 24 months is proposed, with national regulation for priority sectors taking effect by the end of 2028.
-
Provide long-term certainty. The signatories seek policy certainty to protect the hundreds of millions of dollars already invested by governments, businesses and communities in circular economy initiatives.
Pressure ahead of meeting
The intervention comes after the Federal Government confirmed that it would not introduce a new Commonwealth packaging scheme during its current term.
The open letter argues that governments can still make progress through existing legislation, national coordination and the staged introduction of regulated EPR schemes.
Its call also comes amid mounting concern about the viability of domestic recycling and stewardship operations. In packaging, that concern intensified when Recycling Plastics Australia entered voluntary administration, placing jobs and plastics-processing capacity at risk.
One Planet Consulting CEO Helen Millicer said support for regulation extended across business, industry, community and environmental interests.
“There is a real movement here with consistent concern,” she said.
“Producer responsibility is an essential regulatory and financial policy tool used extensively overseas and long required in Australia.”
The letter adds another on-the-record intervention to a reform debate already marked by broad calls for nationally consistent regulation and greater investment certainty.
Attention will now turn to whether environment ministers respond with a defined regulatory pathway and timetable when they meet on Friday.
