The UK government is under fire for reversing a proposed food waste law aimed at mitigating climate change and reducing costs.
- Campaigners argue the abandoned policy could have saved businesses £24.4 million annually by making food waste reporting mandatory.
- Critics suggest the decision could hamper efforts to lower food prices and tackle greenhouse gas emissions.
- The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) justifies the reversal citing potential cost increases for businesses.
- Environmental groups express disappointment over the lack of voluntary food waste reporting and call for reconsideration of the decision.
The UK government is facing significant criticism following its decision to reverse a proposed food waste legislation in England, aimed at reducing food prices and addressing the climate crisis. Campaigners, who have been vocal about the missed opportunity, argue that the legislation could have mandated food waste reporting for large and medium-sized businesses, potentially saving them an estimated £24.4 million annually, according to research by the environmental group Feedback.
This decision is seen by many as a setback in the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, with food waste currently contributing to about 10% of emissions, a figure that surpasses that of the aviation industry. The reversal of the policy has drawn remarks from several environmental advocates, including Martin Bowman, Senior Policy and Campaigns Manager at Feedback, who described the potential savings as an ‘immediately achievable goal’.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) defended its decision by highlighting the economic implications of implementing such regulations. A spokesperson for Defra noted that the regulatory approach would have cost businesses approximately £5.3 million, a burden that could potentially escalate food inflation, thus affecting consumers. In contrast, Defra is advocating for an increase in voluntary reporting through the government-funded waste charity Wrap’s specialist taskforce.
However, the effectiveness of voluntary reporting is being questioned. Wrap has expressed concerns over the low levels of voluntary compliance observed among businesses, suggesting that ‘enhanced voluntary reporting’ may not only be less effective but could also prove to be more expensive than the initially proposed mandatory measures. Jamie Crummie, co-founder of Too Good To Go, echoed these sentiments, urging Defra to reconsider its stance, especially given the pressing impacts of climate change observed across Europe this summer.
In summary, the government’s decision has left campaigners and environmental groups dissatisfied, urging a rethink on food waste policies if meaningful progress on energy conservation and price reductions is to be achieved.
The backlash against the government’s decision highlights the complexity of balancing economic and environmental priorities in food waste management.
