Glenda Daniels
Collect-a-bag scheme? Biodegradable plastics? Spot fines for litterbugs? Brown paper bags? Ten cents for your own plastic bag? These proposals are probably not up for negotiation before the government uses its big stick on environmentally unsound plastic bags.
Regulations were passed last year, and from January next year stiff penalties up to R10 000 or a year in jail will be imposed on lawbreakers. The law has not yet been gazetted, giving up-in-arms labour and plastic manufacturers their last chance to dissuade the government from forging ahead.
Labour has warned of protests this year against the banning of plastic bags because of job losses in the industry of up to 7 000, and more than 70 000 when related industries are included.
The government and environmental groups are on the same side, making persuasive arguments against the use of thin plastic bags. The government says plastic bags used in South Africa are too thin to make recycling economically viable. These bags have led to a chronic littering problem; hence the ban on all plastics less than the 80 microns the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism has stipulated. Currently the average supermarket bag is 17 microns.
The South African Environmental Project says South Africa uses eight billion thin plastic bags a year “one for every human on the planet or two each for those in China and India”.
This NGO says the problem with thin plastic bags is littering, but there are alternatives:
Increasing the minimum thickness of bags, which is the global trend in developed countries and some developing countries such as India.
Imposing harsh fines for littering, as in Singapore.
Switching to biodegradable plastic, where starch and other additives are put into the mix.
The president of the Plastics Federation of South Africa, Wolfgang Raffalsky, says his organisation is “shocked” at the government’s move and he is concerned about the collapse of the industry and the resultant job losses. His estimate of job losses is 4000 in industries under the Plastics Federation umbrella.
However, he says, the federation has a year in which to try to convince the government to change its mind and reduce the regulated thickness to 25 microns rather than 80 microns, which would require new equipment.
The federation is proposing making bigger bags so that fewer are used. In addition, these would be more cost-effective to recycle and there would be less of a throw-away problem.
“Ultimately, we have to change the culture that ‘it’s okay to throw away’. That’s why we are flabbergasted the government wants to go ahead with this legislation,” says Raffalsky.
“We believe the government is making the wrong decision. Besides the job losses, the legislation would make the investment in the country of about R500-million redundant. We are sending out the wrong signals for a region seeking investment.”
Plastics are not the problem, Raffalsky argues, littering is. The federation intends to step up public-awareness campaigns, while urging the government to do the same. The industry is also proposing a collect-a-bag scheme as an incentive to clean up litter.
The Chemical, Energy, Paper, Printing Wood and Allied Workers’ Union says that besides the massive job losses in the industry, related industries such as retail, raw-material suppliers and printing will also be affected.
The union says communities will be inconvenienced, with consumers having to carry plastic bags to shops, and argues that the government should consider alternatives to cut pollution, such as waste recycling.
The union’s assertions are supported by a recent National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) study, which says the “major impact, in terms of labour, of the proposed regulations is the impact on jobs and, cascading from this, the impact on wage earners’ dependants. The impact of these two factors is modified by the quality and remuneration of the jobs lost or gained. In brief, the loss of jobs is likely to push workers and their dependants into poverty.”
The Nedlac research shows that the closure of the domestic plastic industry, and its off-shoots, would mean a total of 71 401 jobs lost.
This year the union’s plan of action is to try to force the government to consider alternative proposals such as waste recycling, which would have positive spin-offs for job-creation; lobbying members of Parliament; engaging alliance partners and other progressive organs of civil society and mobilising its members and the Congress of South African Trade Unions affiliates for protests in terms of Section 77 of the Labour Relations Act.
The South African Environmental Project says there is a global trend towards legislating the thickness of plastic bags, including in developing countries such as India.
“So many plastic carrier bags end up as litter that they have been dubbed the new national flower. The problem is most severe in low-income areas where waste-collection services are inadequate. To address this growing problem the government has suggested banning plastic bags.
“This will not solve the real problem, namely littering, but VCBs (vest-type carrier bags, or the common ones), although they make up less than 5% of the total litter stream, are a very visible aspect of littering that has an impact on tourism and agriculture. It is a step in the right direction towards solving the litter problem and has opened up a much-needed debate on the issue.”
ENDS