VIDEO: Industry Update with Elliot Costello

PKN EXCLUSIVE: With pressure mounting for packaging reform, Phantm CEO Elliot Costello tells PKN a national EPR scheme could transform industry economics, accelerate design change and strengthen Australia’s recycling system.

Video transcript (edited for clarity)

Lindy Hughson in conversation with Elliot Costello, CEO, Phantm.

Lindy Hughson:
Packaging reform is back in focus, with growing pressure on government and industry to move beyond targets and deliver a system that works. Following the recent Environment Ministers meeting, momentum is building around a national approach to product stewardship.

Elliot, everyone is calling this a critical window for reform. What has changed politically or structurally to make this moment different?

Elliot Costello:
In short, policymakers are now listening. Packaging reform has been on and off the agenda since 1999, but what’s different now is that Minister Watt has formally tasked officials to return to the next environment ministers meeting with a draft intergovernmental agreement.

That’s a delivery mandate, not another review. States are pushing for national harmonisation, industry wants clarity, and environmental groups are calling for stronger action. At the same time, Australia is lagging behind trading partners, and supply chain disruptions are exposing system weaknesses.

All of that is converging to create real momentum toward a national framework, potentially landing in 2027.

Lindy Hughson:
The core proposal you’re advocating is “one country, one system”. In practical terms, what would that look like for packaging producers?

Elliot Costello:
It’s about reducing fragmentation and creating clarity. One set of definitions, one reporting framework, and one national fee schedule.

Producers would report standardised packaging data into a single system, with fees based on material type and weight. Hard-to-recycle formats would attract higher fees, while recyclable formats would be lower.

That creates a built-in incentive to redesign packaging within a consistent national structure.

Lindy Hughson:
You and others say the current system has failed. Where are the biggest shortcomings?

Elliot Costello:
The voluntary system doesn’t deliver enough value. It allows free riders, and we’ve missed the 2025 national packaging targets.

The system helped get us started, but it has plateaued. Voluntary obligations become deprioritised when market conditions tighten.

Without regulation, momentum is weak. And without momentum, investment stalls. That’s why a mandatory approach with clear consequences is needed.

Lindy Hughson:
Cost is a major concern for industry. You’ve said the consumer impact would be negligible. How confident are you in that modelling?

Elliot Costello:
Costs matter, especially in the current environment. But our modelling, based on UK data and validated against Australian analysis, suggests EPR would add around 0.1% to product costs.

That’s roughly 25 cents per household on an average grocery bill. We’re also proposing a phased approach, with no impact in the first one to two years, giving policymakers flexibility.

Importantly, every dollar collected is reinvested into the system, reducing long-term waste management costs.

Lindy Hughson:
What would this mean for local industry and sovereign capability, particularly given current supply chain disruptions?

Elliot Costello:
Australia doesn’t have a recycling problem, it has a utilisation problem. Infrastructure exists, but it’s underused because there’s no guaranteed demand for recycled material.

An EPR framework creates a stable funding stream and drives demand for recycled content. That gives recyclers the confidence to invest and operate.

It also strengthens sovereign capability. We rely heavily on imported resin, and current disruptions highlight the need to build domestic capacity.

Lindy Hughson:
How quickly would EPR start to influence packaging design?

Elliot Costello:
The signal is immediate. As soon as direction is clear, brands begin optimising.

EPR rewards better design upstream, not just recycling downstream. That means reduction, simplification, and better material selection.

We’re already seeing leading brands move ahead of regulation because it makes commercial sense.

Lindy Hughson:
You recently brought together a broad coalition in an open letter to government. Where does disagreement still exist?

Elliot Costello:
There’s actually strong alignment across industry, ENGOs, and recyclers. That’s unusual and significant.

The remaining differences are around scheme design, governance, and fee settings. It’s more about pace and sequencing than the end goal.

The destination is broadly agreed.

Lindy Hughson:
What are the risks if Australia continues to lag behind global EPR adoption?

Elliot Costello:
This is no longer just a waste issue, it’s a trade competitiveness issue. Around 63% of our trading partners already have, or are implementing, EPR.

Without a domestic framework, Australian exporters face barriers, and imports risk undermining local standards.

There’s also the risk that Australia becomes a destination for hard-to-recycle packaging if we don’t set clear rules.

Lindy Hughson:
What should Australia avoid when designing its EPR scheme?

Elliot Costello:
The biggest risk is delaying action in pursuit of perfection.

We have the framework, the evidence, and the alignment. The priority should be to legislate, build the data infrastructure, and improve the system over time.

Australia also has an opportunity to learn from other markets and design a world-class system.

Lindy Hughson:
Finally, what needs to happen next to maintain momentum?

Elliot Costello:
Officials have been tasked with delivering an actionable agreement at the next ministers meeting. That needs to be honoured.

We’re also expecting an announcement ahead of the federal budget. From there, it’s about legislative commitment and building the system architecture.

Industry’s role is to stay united, remain vocal, and demonstrate alignment. The economics are sound, but the cost of delay will continue to grow.

Lindy Hughson:
Elliot, thanks for your insights.

Elliot Costello:
Thanks, Lindy. I appreciate the opportunity.