Bishop Hill The plastic bag scam
Aug 14, 2014 Greens Some time ago it was announced that a compulsory charge would be introduced on plastic bags at retail shops, the proceeds to be distributed to good causes. At the time I suggested that the likely beneficiaries would be the same green NGOs that had campaigned for the introduction of the charge and lo and behold take a look at this:
For the first time, Tesco customers will be asked to choose the charities and environmental organisations that will benefit from an estimated £1.8 million set to be raised from carrier bag charges in Wales and Scotland.
The organisations on the shortlist for Scotland are Love Food Hate Waste, Keep Scotland Beautiful and Groundwork UK. For Wales, the shortlisted charities are Keep Wales Tidy and Groundwork UK.
Here are Keep Scotland Beautiful's pages on plastic bags. Love Food Hate Waste is a subsidiary of WRAP, the government's pet recycling (i.e. mostly pro-waste) campaign. Groundwork, however, looks clean.
Over the piece, I conclude that I am probably correct. It is a scam.
Reader Comments (58)
I shall be sure to take my Aldi and Lidl bags with me when I go to Tesco.
Groundwork hearts renewables...
http://www.groundwork.org.uk/greener-living
So not totally clean as there is probably some subsidy suckling going on.
I always tell the checkout staff at Tesco when I ask for loads of plastic bags that they are the best, safest and most hygenic way of taking shopping home, and they get reused before being disposed of. I shall buy loads of plastic bags and take them to the supermarket with me after the charge is introduced. I once paid 5p for a bag at M&S and discovered some of the proceeds were going to WWF, so never again. See Why does M&S charge for carrier bags? .
I never go into a supermarket without an adequate supply of re-useable bags, so they won't get a penny out of me. Sports Direct do a really durable polypropylene bag, I think they charge for them, maybe it depends on how much swag you've just bought.
Here are The Federation of Groundwork Trusts (Groundwork UK) accounts for 2013.
IMHO, the only pet recycling that works is burying Fido in the back garden and planting peas
;-)
A 5p charge is a complete rip off. They can be bought in bulk for less than 1p. See for example here
When my shopping bags come to their useful end, they get recycled as rubbish bags. Other than that I use my rucksack to carry home the shopping
Aren't the Green Taliban just wonderful. They make extorting money from the public sound like they are doing a great service. Yes Saving the Planet what else.
Funny how these green groups have soaring incomes and have managed to create a huge increase in fual poverty. Well that's why the poor are there, to be milked by the Greens.
Thank you Mr Bratby, that's just what I was looking for. I'm sure companies like that will be doing a fine trade.
A typical scam carried out by the big business in bed with government. They have forgotten the basis for food packaging, originally it was based on hygiene worries then it enabled Supermarkets to buy in ready packaged goods saving the handling of individual items.. Hygiene is still a valid argument, the rest is pure theft. Charity is that given voluntarily, forced giving as Tesco do is extortion.
From the press release: "The organisations on the shortlist for Scotland are Love Food Hate Waste, Keep Scotland Beautiful and Groundwork UK. For Wales, the shortlisted charities are Keep Wales Tidy and Groundwork UK."
Followed by: "120 organisations applied for the Scottish and Welsh partnerships, and they have since been whittled down to the five-strong shortlist."
Groundwork UK has been counted twice.
The legislation tends to specify the plastic carrier bags as single use according to their physical properties - one of which is the thickness. If the shops didn't want to pay this extortion they could use slightly thicker bags that are not classified as single use. I also have a sneaking suspicion they aren't (yet) actually obliged to hand over the money to charities either, they are doing so for the PR. Perhaps it is a situation akin to food manufacturers being threated with regulation if they don't reduce salt levels and portion sizes.
It has worked well in Wales with little or no public opposition. I never pay the charge, since I now use my own bags as most other people. I take the point though that no one has ever asked mewhere I would like the levy to go? This is not a scam as it has had an effect on general litter in Wales.
This is nasty, imposed tokenism. Designed to involve and indoctrinate.
I follow a hipster pop girl on twitter (she was on Jules Holland) . She demanded a glass for her water, returning the planet destroying plastic cup in disgust. This was on a flight from Vancouver to Moscow to play a private gig for a few people, complete with (real) Mafia security guard. She is insane.
This is vile, sneering, lobotomised political correctness at its worst.
Colchester Borough Council fell hook line and sinker for the food waste scam, now we have another category of waste sorting/collection.
This needs an extra run to collect it, so a new diesel truck does the rounds of Colchester to collect the bins. Very environmentally friendly. The food waste bin is not much larger than the size of a bucket. Surely, if we were generating as much food waste as the liars are telling us we are, we would need something slightly larger for the weekly collection.
"I conclude that I am probably correct. It is a scam."
Don't mince your words, Bish, it's a TAX.
I started writing "Good bit of work, Bishop" then I noticed that I had missed out one of the vowels in the first word and of course spell check had not changed it.
I do wonder about the mass of NGOs, lobbying groups, quangos and so-called charities. While some of them do good work, I'm sure a lot of them are cynically milking the system while being paid by us. Have you noticed the huge number of organisations that pop up in BBC news bulletins? It seems that every topic has institutes, centres, foundations, think tanks and the like in huge numbers. I guess that we pay for most of them to exist then in the milking process we pay again to make them rich.
Dissuading the public from wasting plastic seems perfectly reasonable and if the retailers want to spin a bit of "greenwash" that won't damage the bottom line either. I don't think small retailers fall within the charge in anycase. This is too trivial to detract from ramping up the debate on the UK having a coherent energy plan based on affordability, security, competitiveness in the global economy rather than agenda driven fearmongering on an epic scale. Let's be magnaminous and allow Nick Clegg his moment of political triumph ;)
@Max Roberts
All of our food waste goes into either the chickens or the compost.
Does everything not still come sturdily wrapped in greaseproof or butcher's paper? I must have missed something. I must ask the good lady wife who deals with all these domestic matters.....
Like, I suspect, most people we reuse the supermarket bags as bin liners. We shall still use bin liners ( cheaply thanks to Phillip Bratby ) Reduction in use of plastic bags? Zero.
How sad the British Isles languages have degenerated to the point where "tax" is no longer used.
My local authority insist that waste for recycling must be separated by type by using plastic bags, or they won't take it. Usually that involves about 6-8 carrier bags a week. The point where I'm charged for plastic bags is the point where all of my waste goes into one big, black bin-bag.
Stonyground
Always worth checking the original sources, they make fascinating, if turgid reading.
Composted food and leftovers fed to animals are counted towards the food waste headline figures that are thrown about.
So, you thought that keeping chickens and composting might get you environmental bonus points, but no. In the eyes of these charlatans, you are wasting food just as much as everyone else!
The plastic bag fee was occurring in Canada a few years ago with the fee supposedly being remitted to the usual suspects as noted in the article. It has just faded away now. I know that I refused to pay for bags at a large bookstore chain because the fee was being directed to the WWE. That chain has ceased charging now as well. The whole idea appears to have just faded away. One does see people carrying their own bags to grocery stores but this is becoming much less common as well.
They don't police how many bags you can take at the self-service tills. :)
Even if the 'bag tax' is not passed on it will still be collected from the shop...presumably when they buy their bags. So you end up paying it in price hikes. So beware of the 'free bags' war that will erupt.
This has been in force in Holland for some time now and it just means people shove a couple of bags in their bike saddle bags when they go shopping. The only people who lose are the discounters like Lidl who don't already give away free bags.
I get a small pleasure from putting my Waitrose shopping in my Lidl bag and vice versa. ;)
Morrisons is case of pay a few pence for 1st one then each time it tears/holes, replacement free. Done that about 4 times over 4 years, not big holes either.
Re: E. Smiff
> She demanded a glass for her water, returning the planet destroying plastic cup in disgust.
Err, the glass is the one that is planet destroying.
A study (which I haven't been able to find again so this is from memory) found that the most eco friendly (including ending up in landfill) was the plastic cup followed by the paper cup with the re-usable one only being better if it was washed in a dishwasher and re-used at least 1000 times.
I remember the ubiquitous "paper or plastic" question when shopping in the US - I would always say at the top of my voice "Plastic please, they make the best bin bags." Used to get the odd smirk from other shoppers, but I figure most people assumed I was a weirdo Brit and ignored me. Ho hum.
'Keep Scotland Beautiful'..?
What, with all those wind turbines scarring the landscape..?
Can't the greens ever get it right.
Get rid of that awful clear plastic 'security' packaging that holds small durable parts in an impenetrable bubble of frustration.
Small shops will allegedly be exempt - cue occasional trips to the Co-op; Spar etc...
'Would you like a bag for your packet of razor blades, sir..?'
'Nah - oops, on second thoughts yes please...'
@Phillip Bratby
You have to admit M&S are better, such quality.
So put on the muted trombone jazz music and sit back and enjoy.
Because -
There's Green Blob Scams and there's M&S tax efficient, Plan A, Green Blob Scams.
:-)
"20 MPH speed limits, a levy on plastic bags and reducing night lighting would cost little but deliver significant gains"
So said the "Jolly Green Duo", Bennett and Lucas as a New Year present in the Grauniad, in January 2013.
My daughter who went to same expensive Girls School as Caroline Lucas, now lives in Brighton and actually voted for her, but like most of the other residents is heartily fed up with the Green Dictatorship of Kitcat and Lucas.
It's a pity more people haven't had a chance to see how awful life would be if these people had REAL power.
Those who lived in the former Soviet Union will have, of course.
My recollection is that the raw material for these thin plastic bags is one of the lightest fractions of crude oil which might end up being flared off if no other use is found for it. Can anyone with better knowledge of petrochem confirm or reject this?
" the government's pet recycling" Oh gawd, which recycling bin are we supposed to use for pets?
Having been on the sidelines of the world of plastics professionally, I sat and watched the whole thing swing in to the spotlight, and if not first hand, with a ringside seat to the arguments (some heated), pros and cons.
For now, I have to say that beyond the human cost of a contracting industry, the reduction in plastic bags seems worthwhile. Though I am a lot less thrilled with 'alternatives', especially any that end up in the food chain at a molecular level. Witches' Knickers are horrible on all levels, and yes can choke a turtle, but bound into the musculature of the food chain sends shivers down my spine.
So... we have scores of hempy jobbies, mostly snagged at expos. Free... do the job.. why not? The only exception is fresh meats & fish, as we prefer to isolate 'juices' that may cause transferable issues next shop. And the plastics we get from these shops are all used in wastebins, dog scooping etc.
Looking at this piece I stumbled on 'scam'. Is that a fair word? I'd say not.
But having said it, my eye-brow cranks when money in name of 'goodness' goes to places I have little control over.
Especially when it looks like it is to plug funding gaps.
On the face of it, an eco-tax funding eco-projects is pretty logical, and cool. I certainly think car taxes should go to car-related matters, and not get hived off using one consumer set to subsidise another by stealth, as can happen.
But there is what was initially claimed vs. what seems to be happening. However here corporate choice and market forces prevail.
If a supermarket is compelled to pass this tax on to the consumer they clearly will. No real cost to them, less admin fees. So ultimately 'we' pay anyway.
So it may be nice to have a say in what 'we' are funding. And the conflict of interest aspects are striking, as those paid by us to demand the imposition of this tax on us are now those apparently getting the money from it.
As I say, if worthy, and within the green arena, fine.
But with some of these mega-quangos there's little to like. Vast money passes through, and not much ends up where it does actual good. They seem more mechanisms to create empires of real estate, staff, boards, jollies and self-perpetuating marketing budgets. More a way to tick some boxes and keep a bunch of folk off the unemployment stats.
Scam? No. But worth staying abreast, and on top of... yes.
And at least, if it is the supermarkets we shop at, the power of consumer choice can prevail. If something doesn't add up, I won't buy it and I'll tell them why.
Terrys: I have these links.
You need to use a reusable grocery bag 130 to 170 times, before it has a lower eco-footprint than a plastic bag.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358885/Why-need-use-environmentally-friendly-cotton-carrier-bag-171-times-green.html
Foam cups have smaller environmental footprints than paper.
Abstract An analysis of the overall relative merits of the use of uncoated paper vs molded polystyrene bead foam in single-use 8-oz cups is described here as a manageable example of the use of paper vs plastics in packaging. In raw material requirements the paper cup required about 2.5 times its finished weight of raw wood and about the same hydrocarbon fueling requirement as is needed for the polystyrene foam cup. To process the raw materials about six times as much steam, 13 times as much electric power, and twice as much cooling water are consumed to produce the paper cup as compared to the polystyrene foam cup. Emission rates to air are similar and to water are generally higher for the paper cup.
Virtually all primary use factors favor polystyrene foam over paper. Once used both cup types may be recycled. Landfill disposal of the two items under dry conditions will occupy similar landfill volumes after compaction and will confer similarly slow to nonexistent decomposition to either option"
http://www.springerlink.com/content/b55256333584v60n/
Reusable cups use the same, or more, energy per use, as paper or foam cups.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/c275588280002wp8/
We've had a 5p bag tax in Wales for 3 or 4 years.It's been a boon for shoplifters. If you've just bought a pair of shoes, for example, why would you need to put the shoebox in a bag? The result is people walking out of shops with their purchases unbagged - making it difficult at the door to work out who has paid and who hasn't.
The law of unintended consequences claims another victim.
IIRC correctly this War on Plastic Bags was first heard of after widespread coverage of the problems of albatrosses on Midway Island, which were suffering cruelly and fatally having made mistakes in selecting things to eat from the Pacific Gyre - many thousands of slow deaths. So I have to ask, how much of this extortion is helping clean up the Pacific Gyre? (That, of course, would be real some environmentalism).
On topic wrt taxes and in honor of the recently departed...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0ahJPxfGp4
"how much of this extortion is helping clean up the Pacific Gyre?"
Good question. I imagine that very few of those bags are from the average citizen's weekly shop. Most likely from shipping (esp. cruise liners) whose operators invariably chuck any waste over the side.
In any case, the amount of plastic used in immediate packing (e.g. milk containers, drinks bottles and pre-packed everything else) vastly exceeds the minimal amount used to carry it all home.
Shipping, shopping..
Perhaps it was all because of a typo!
What Pacific Gyre? Is this related to the fictitious (never photographed or mapped) Island of Plastic that is supposed to be out there somewhere?
The figures cited for deaths of sea creatures by plastic bag have never even been demonstrated once, let alone verified. They were bootstrapped from a single study of lost fishing nets and similar gear somewhere near Canada. The whole thing is a complete scam.
We have the same stupid regime here in the inland city where I live. Even if it were true, there is no chance of our bags ever getting anywhere near the sea. It's just "plastic is eeevil" superstitious nonsense, which has done nothing but make modern life more expensive and inconvenient - which seems to be the underlying aim of most of these sorts of policies.
The bag tax was in section 77 of the Climate Change Act 2008.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/27/contents/enacted
Aldi and Lidl have long charged 3p for their basic bags and 6p for a larger, more durable bag. The basic bags are of higher quality than the freebies from the major supermarkets. They also make better bin bags, as the freebies often have holes in the bottom.
The response from the supermarkets will be to provide higher quality bags, that do not fall apart with more than 5kg of shopping in them. As more shoppers will re-use bags, it will be a greater opportunity to have brand placement in their rivals shops. The net environmental impact could be negative, as the bags are used on an insufficient times to justify their extra environmental cost.
Kevin, but surely the fundamental question is - why should the State be involved in our supermarket bags?
"but surely the fundamental question is - why should the State be involved in our supermarket bags?"
Ultimately, because a plurality of the population voted for politicians who like to do that sort of thing, because they think it's what we want. And a lot of us do.
The thing is, if you offer people the chance, a lot of them like telling other people what to do. That's why certain countries have constitutions - to limit what the State is allowed to do, even if a plurality of the population want them to. The problem is, if you don't already have a suitable constitution, you can't easily get to there from here. How do you get Statists to vote for a constitution that would stop the State interfering in other people's business? What's to stop *them* putting in rules to enshrine their *unalterable right* to interfere?
What with the modern socialist education system, most people are not taught about the philosophy of government, and don't understand the consequences of their policies and preferences. So that sort of libertarian ideal is out of fashion nowadays. Unfortunately.
NiV: inalienable, surely?
Ah, you beat me to it. As far as I can see, the idea that one can fly over and see (photograph) a huge Island of garbage in any of our oceans is one of those nice urban myths that the Green Taliban love so much.
It looks to be a higher density of micro fragments of various plastics detected in certain tidal dead zones throughout the worlds oceans. Wiki (yes, I know) puts it at 5kg/km^2 which would sound like, in 3D (say 5m depth), millionths (billionths?) of a percentage of water. There is likely Uranium at that density in the same sample.
Don't get me wrong, I use the countryside and our coast (rod and line fisherman) on a regular basis and would generally support anything that minimises our impact on these areas. If I sound a little cynical of 'green lies' then it is because I am. I view them as the greatest danger to environmental progress. Their lies, once exposed, turn potential supporters into 'hardcore' enemies. They betray the very people who might have best support their 'alleged' aims.
It was interesting to digest a WUWT piece earlier on the 'mental illness' that some 'greens' are now suffering having sustained repeated blows on their march to world class nonsense. What they miss, of course, is that, were they really promoting the environment, they should have actively promoting achievable goals. Not 'making shit up' to get a better seat at the 'world government' table.
I always remember a 'Green' who, years ago, spotted me on the way home from fishing our local river. He mocked me repeatedly for having spent my time fishing a 'dead' river. Even with photos of the fish I had landed he just wouldn't back down. The river was polluted and I had been an idiot trying to find fish it. This is 'Green'. Even pictures taken a few hours earlier cannot convince a disciple that he is wrong. One just can't reason with them.