Environmental Protection

17:22:00

I beg to move, That the draft Deposit Scheme for Drinks Containers (England and Northern Ireland) Regulations 2024, which were laid before this House on 25 November 2024, be approved. It is a red-letter day, is it not, Madam Deputy Speaker? Back in 2017, the Environmental Audit Committee, which I chaired, reported on the UK’s appalling record on recycling plastic bottles, and recommended the introduction by Government of a deposit return scheme. I have the report and the then Government’s response with me. Previous Governments promised that such a scheme would be put in place, yet here we are. The Conservatives recycled Ministers at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs up to seven times, but they did little to reduce the millions of empty plastic containers littering our high streets, washing up on our beaches and polluting our rivers. We have known for decades that the “take, make, throw” model causes harm. It leads to littering, landfill and incineration. Keep Britain Tidy estimates that two waste streams, plastic bottles and drinks cans, make up 55% of all litter across the UK. When it comes to addressing waste, this Government will not waste time. We are turning back the plastic tide and moving to a circular economy that keeps valuable resources in use for longer.

The Minister will know that incinerators are now the dirtiest way in which we generate electricity—dirtier than coal. Further to her Department’s advice note dated 30 December, what will she do to place a moratorium on the construction of new waste burners, thus bringing us in line with more enlightened Administrations—in this respect at least—in Wales and Scotland?

The right hon. Gentleman is right that we made an announcement on that issue. We will bring forward further guidance and work with local authorities as they examine what is before them, so there will be more to say on this at a later date. Returning to the issue of getting money back on bottles and cans, deposit return schemes and other such schemes are a well-established method of keeping resources in use for longer. Many of us generation X MPs will remember using these schemes in our school days. Over 50 countries run money-back bottle schemes, creating an incentive to return drinks containers for reuse or recycling. Germany had a 98% return rate—the highest in Europe—in its deposit return scheme last year. I met the Irish Minister Ossian Smyth just last week; Ireland’s deposit return scheme was introduced only in February 2024, and it is already achieving a 90% return rate. The UK is way behind, with collection rates ranging from 71% to 76% for plastic bottles and metal cans. We can, must and will do better.

I thank the Minister for introducing the issue. Could she kindly outline the discussions that she and the Government have had directly with Northern Ireland? I do not want to be a Job’s comforter, but we have asked some questions, and it does not seem that anybody in Northern Ireland can tell us what the connections and discussions have been.

I am very happy to say that we discussed the fact that when this scheme comes in, there will be a scheme in Northern Ireland, and one in the south. However, the currencies are obviously different, so we will have to get the scheme up and running before we look at whether there is scope for interoperability. That is basically where we are with Northern Ireland.

I am not trying to be awkward—it is never my form—but can the Minister say which Minister or Department her Government have spoken to about this system, and how we in Northern Ireland can have input into this process, other than just from this place?

As I say, I was talking last week to Ossian Smyth, who is the outgoing Minister in the Republic of Ireland. We have been in discussion with officials over the past several years; the previous Government, members of which are in the Chamber today, have been in discussion with officials at the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, and I met the Minister for a general introduction before Christmas.

I will make some progress, and I will perhaps come back to the hon. Gentleman later.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, and commend the excellent work that she did on this subject as Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee. I think another Select Committee then looked at this subject in 2022, and the Government at that stage said that they would implement a deposit return scheme. Does my hon. Friend accept that over 200,000 people responded to the consultation that was then run, and 84% of respondents said that they agreed with implementing such a scheme?

I thank my hon. Friend for that point. This move has overwhelming support from the general public, who are sick to death and fed up of seeing their streets and rivers blighted by litter. Slovakia implemented a scheme in 2022, and that country now has a 92% return rate; it is right up there with countries that have had schemes for decades. We know that we can do the same in the UK; just look at how behaviour has changed since the introduction of charges for carrier bags in shops. That led to a rapid change in people’s habits. Imagine where we would be if the previous Government had focused on recycling plastic bottles, rather than smuggling champagne bottles in suitcases into Downing Street. The deposit return scheme is one of the three strands of our packaging reforms, along with extended producer responsibility for packaging and the simpler recycling programme for England. We estimate that, together, the packaging reforms will support 21,000 new green jobs in our nations and regions, and stimulate more than £10 billion of investment in recycling capability over the next decade. CPRE, the countryside charity, estimates that the deposit return scheme will deliver 4,000 of those new jobs. It is also estimated that the reforms will save over 46 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2035, valued at more than £10 billion in carbon benefits. The deposit return scheme will end the epidemic of litter on our streets and restore pride in our communities. It will improve the countryside, preserve our wildlife and protect our beaches and marine environment. I have spoken to several fantastic organisations that were part of the huge campaign that my hon. Friend the Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) mentioned, including the Marine Conservation Society, the Aylesbury Wombles and, in my constituency, Destination Ball Hill. There are so many people spending so many volunteer hours dealing with this pollution problem, and doing their best to keep their area looking nice. The brilliant charity Keep Britain Tidy estimates that littered drinks bottles and cans along our roadsides are killing millions of our native mammals every year. If we drive along the M1 motorway, we see buzzards and birds of prey circling, and that is because our national highways have become nature corridors. They are a very important habitat for RES—rare and endangered species—and much-loved small mammals such as shrews, bank voles and wood mice, but we are finding more and more of them becoming trapped in plastic bottles carelessly discarded along our highways. We must act to protect these precious creatures. We want less Mr Toad and more Moley.

I warmly welcome the deposit return scheme; it would have been fantastic if it had been delivered many years ago, as had been promised. On the wider issue of litter affecting our constituencies, will the Minister say more about how this measure fits in with the work the Government are doing to, for want of a better phrase, get tough on litter and tough on the causes of litter?

I thank my hon. Friend for that, and we are looking at what further reforms we can bring in to tackle the rogue waste collectors. The carriers, brokers and dealers regime is not fit for purpose. I have asked officials to look at what we can do to strengthen that, and to avoid the sort of casual criminality we saw just yesterday in the constituency of Lichfield, where waste from a construction site was abandoned in the middle of a country lane, literally trapping nine households in their houses; they were unable to leave. I understand that the Environment Agency has been in touch, and the council is working to clear that blockage. It is clear that, with this Government, the era of talking is over and the era of action is upon us, and there will be nowhere for these waste criminals to hide. The deposit return scheme is about having a more resource-resilient economy, and not being reliant on materials brought in from overseas. The scheme under the statutory instrument that we are discussing is consistent with the “polluter pays” principle. Giving money back for bottles and cans provides an incentive for people to do the right thing. It places obligations on drinks producers, not consumers, to ensure that containers are collected and recycled. We have set an ambitious target of collecting 90% of in-scope containers by the third year of the scheme. I am confident that the public are with us. We know people hate litter in their parks, in their countryside and on their streets. As with plastic bag charges, once this is the norm, people will just get on with it. Small changes for individuals will deliver huge national benefits. I will now turn to the details of this instrument. Laid in draft before the House on 25 November 2024, this instrument establishes in England and Northern Ireland, and I can tell the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that Minister Muir is the responsible Minister in Northern Ireland—

I know it is Minister Muir. I respect the hon. Lady greatly, but what discussions has Minister Muir had with the Department, because I understand there have been none? Ministers from down south are not responsible for Northern Ireland, we in Northern Ireland are and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister is. Can the hon. Lady gee up her civil servants and tell us what is happening?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that my excellent officials, led by the estimable Clare Delaney, have been shepherding this through. They will have had extensive conversations with officials. I met with the Minister on the taskforce on woodland creation before Christmas as well, so we are in regular contact and I will make a point of discussing this with him—but I am sure the hon. Gentleman will make a point of discussing this with him as well.

As I am sure the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) would attest, Keep Northern Ireland Beautiful estimates that we have 420 million plastic bottles and 90 million cans in Northern Ireland so we have a lot of work to do on reduction. The scheme is working really well in the Republic and I am an avid user of it when I am down south, but while it is a big draw into supermarkets, particularly the multiples, are there any provisions in place to help smaller retailers put the infrastructure in place so that they get a piece of the action as well?

My hon. Friend makes a good point. We have been engaging extensively with the Association of Convenience Stores because it is imperative that they do not miss out or else we will end up with a scheme run by large retailers for large retailers. It is in the design of the scheme that the deposit management organisation which this instrument sets up must have representatives from large and small retailers on its board to ensure that the full voice is heard. In fact I am about to tell my hon. Friend and the House about the details of this. A person who is supplied with drink in a container that is in scope of this instrument pays a deposit which can be redeemed when it is returned for recycling. The design is informed by well-established international examples and extensive industry engagement over many years—about seven years. Industry partners have shared their experiences delivering these schemes across the world and the scheme will be centrally managed by an industry-led, not-for-profit organisation: the deposit management organisation. The instrument applies to England and Northern Ireland. My officials have worked closely with the Scottish Government, who are amending their existing legislation so that we can launch compatible schemes simultaneously across England, Northern Ireland and Scotland in 2027. The Welsh Government have withdrawn from the four-nation DRS approach; however, we are keen to remain in close working partnership with them as they make decisions regarding a DRS in Wales. We are keen to keep the door open, to provide as much interoperability across the UK as possible. I acknowledge the work of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee, which draws this instrument to the special attention of the House on the grounds that it is politically or legally important and gives rise to issues of public policy likely to be of interest to the House. The instrument sets out the scope of the scheme and places obligations on drinks producers, importers and retailers. Producers of drinks in plastic and metal containers will be obligated to label products and charge a deposit when supplying the drink into England and Northern Ireland. They must also pay the deposit to the deposit management organisation along with the producer fees to fund the scheme. Retailers across England and Northern Ireland will be obligated to participate in the scheme by charging a deposit on plastic and metal drinks containers, taking the containers back and refunding the deposit. They are also required to pass the collected containers to the deposit management organisation for recycling and to display information to consumers so that they understand how the scheme works. Those obligations on producers and retailers across England and Northern Ireland will start from launch in October 2027. To administer the scheme, the instrument requires the appointment of a deposit management organisation. The instrument allows for certain provisions to come into force on the day after it is made that are necessary for the appointment of the deposit management organisation and the establishment of the administrative arrangements.

The Minister has been most generous in giving way to Members. She mentioned that the scheme will apply to plastic and metal drinks containers. What discussions has she had, or what information have her officials gathered, about the potential for manufacturers to switch their containers to glass and the impact that might have on use of resource and climate change?

There has been talk of that, and I met with the glass industry recently, but so far we have seen no evidence of manufacturers switching. Manufacturers must be part of the deposit management organisation, so they will pay under either EPR—extended producer responsibility for packaging—or DRS. Glass has been excluded from scope on the basis of extensive consultation. The DMO will be appointed in April 2025. It will be obligated to: meet collection targets; pay return point operators for collecting containers; recycle the collected containers; and pay national enforcement authorities. The instrument provides powers for the deposit management organisation to set deposit levels, prescribe labelling, interact with other schemes, set producer fees, calculate handling fees for return points and exempt some retailers from hosting a return point. Under the “polluter pays” principle, it is the responsibility of businesses to bear the costs of managing the packaging they place on the market. Through specific return point exemptions based on store size, proximity to another return point and suitable premises grounds, this instrument will also protect small businesses across England and Northern Ireland, which we recognise are vital to our high streets and communities. Further information has come to light since the question asked by the hon. Member for Strangford. I am in contact with Minister Muir as we progress, but Northern Ireland has given DEFRA responsibility for delivering the scheme, so this statutory instrument has Northern Ireland’s consent. I hope that answers his question. Finally, the instrument makes provision for monitoring and enforcement activities by the Environment Agency and by local authority trading standards officers to ensure obligated businesses and the deposit management organisation are compliant. This deposit return scheme will improve recycling rates and provide better quality material for recycling. [Interruption.] Was I asked to give way? I do give way.

I am sorry; I was being quiet and shy, which I am well known for in this place. The Minister rightly points out that some of the responsibility will now fall to trading standards and local authorities. Can she give an undertaking to the House that, with that new responsibility, there may be some element of new burden funding so that local authorities are properly resourced to undertake the enforcement of this vital protection?

Local authorities have been given new burdens funding to prepare for the simpler recycling reforms, but I will take my hon. Friend’s question back and endeavour to get an answer to him, hopefully by the end of this debate. Who knows, it could come sooner. The DRS will improve recycling rates, and by giving people money back on their bottles we transform their plastic and metal drinks containers from a waste stream to a resource stream. That will make a positive difference to every single street where we live. Nobody wants to see plastic and cans littering our beaches, rivers and seas, our roads and our parks. With this scheme, we will have less litter, less landfill and less harm to our precious wildlife, which is under such pressure, and we really will begin to turn back the plastic tide.

I call the shadow Minister.

17:44:00

I am grateful to the Minister for setting out the Government’s position. Let me place on record the substantial achievements of the last Conservative Government on recycling. This Government do not like the facts, but let me give them some. In 2010, 25,000 tonnes of waste were sent to landfill. By 2022, the last year for which figures are available, that was just 13,000 tonnes—a reduction of almost half. The Conservatives introduced new, straightforward and simpler—Labour will welcome simpler—guidance on recycling by creating standardised rules on what can be recycled to deliver that substantial achievement. Some love to talk, while others quietly act and get on with the job. In my constituency in 2023, Conservative-run West Sussex county council delivered a recycling rate of 53%. For the same period, the Green and Labour-led Brighton and Hove council, just next door, delivered a rate of only 30%. Who would have thought that socialists would struggle to clean up their own mess? Thanks to Conservatives, local authorities are now required to collect a consistent set of recyclable waste and to ensure frequent collections, underpinning a new recycling economy. Let us be clear: Labour-run local authorities deliver the lowest levels of recycling in this country, so the Government could fix this problem without coming to this place to pass legislation.

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Communities in Conservative-controlled local authorities are three times less likely to be subjected to fly-tipping than in Labour-run areas. The Conservatives have a proud record of recycling, and the hon. Member clearly wishes to applaud that, so I give way.

I applaud any movement in the right direction. The hon. Gentleman compares local authorities, but does he accept that many Labour local authorities have high-rise and tenement buildings, where collection is infinitely more difficult than in leafy suburbs with individual detached houses?

The hon. Gentleman knows of what he speaks, and of course I accept that there is wonderful variation across our whole country. That is precisely why I chose two neighbouring authorities. What could be easier than collecting from dense urban areas, compared with the challenges and costs of having to collect waste across far-flung rural communities such as those I represent? Perhaps later we will hear the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer) explain exactly why that council, which drove itself into the ground, has such a poor record on recycling.

Fantastic, we do not have to wait.

As the MP for Bristol Central, I cannot speak directly on behalf of councillors for Brighton and Hove, other than to point out that my understanding is that their hands were tied by a deal that was agreed by the previous Labour administration

I hate to intrude on socialist grief, so let me move on. Business leaders make decisions only when they have considered the context of all external factors, so it is important—I hope the Government agree—that we consider the statutory instrument in the context of the current headwinds faced by British business. Right now, businesses across the land are working through the tough choices they will have to make to keep their businesses viable in the face of this Government’s job-killing, investment-crushing, growth-destroying Budget, because of choices this Government have made. It was this Government who chose to place enormous burdens on business with their new tax on jobs. It was this Government who chose to halve business rates relief for retail and hospitality. It is this Government who are choosing to push through their Employment Rights Bill, which will increase unemployment, as we saw today, and prevent young people from ever getting their first chance of a job. Business confidence has been knocked down and jobs are at risk, and it is no surprise when we consider that not a single person sat around the Cabinet table has real experience of running a business. No sectors have been hit harder than retail and hospitality. The British Retail Consortium has said how Labour’s Budget will increase inflation, slow pay growth, cause shop closures—the very shops that will have to participate in this scheme—and reduce jobs. The CBI has said that retail businesses have gone into “crisis containment”. The Institute of Directors found that economic confidence has fallen for a fourth month running—does anyone know what those four months have in common? The number of businesses closing has increased by 64% since the Budget. That is the shocking reality and the context in which the Government seek to bring forward today’s statutory instrument, putting more burdens and more cost on business.

Does my hon. Friend agree that if the Government were really serious about reduce, reuse, recycle, they would put a moratorium on the construction of new waste incinerators, as we put in our manifesto in July? If we now had a Conservative Government, there would be no more waste incinerators, including in Westbury, in my constituency, which would be matching what the Welsh and Scots have already done.

My right hon. Friend makes a very important point—I hope the Government are listening. That measure would not cost the economy anything, unlike this measure, which, according to the Government’s own impact assessment, will cost the economy. In fact, it will represent a £288 million net cost imposed on business every year, which is a £2.7 billion indirect cost over the 10-year appraisal period. It will be another unsustainable cost heaped on business, and an unwelcome addition to the growing headwinds on enterprise that this Government have created.

Does my hon. Friend share my concern that this measure will create not only headwinds for business, but significant headwinds for the local authorities that use the recyclable and resaleable material from doorstep recycling to subsidise the cost of expanding recycling services to all our residents? By extracting that valuable material from doorstep recycling, we risk pushing up the council tax needed to subsidise recycling services for all.

I agree with my hon. Friend, who makes a very important point. At its heart, it is a failure to identify the real harm that would justify the imposition of real costs on business at this enormously difficult time. The scheme will also have an impact on consumers, because it is ultimately consumers who will bear the burden. It is a highly regressive cost burden that will disproportionately hit those on the lowest income. Research by the Association of Convenience Stores found that a disproportionate amount of people with long-term disabilities or aged over 65 supported the existing model of household collections, which is broadly working well, instead of the deposit return scheme.

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

I give way to the hon. Gentleman, who will hopefully speak about the aggressive nature of these proposals.

I am slightly puzzled. In the Conservative Government’s response to the previous Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee report, they committed to putting these measures in place by 2025. Why have the Conservatives changed their minds so dramatically? Given that it appears that the hon. Gentleman would reject these measures, how does he propose to achieve the target set under section 1 of the Environment Act 2021, which his Government brought forward and for which I commend them, which is supposed to reduce the number of kilograms of residual waste per capita by half, from 577 kg to 287 kg?

When the facts change, we change our minds. The Conservative party is under new leadership and we will be unafraid to speak up for those in the economy who create the growth we so desperately need. If the hon. Member would like me to do so, I would be very happy once again to go through the impact of Labour’s Budget on business—that growth-destroying, jobs-killing, economy-sapping Budget. I would be very happy to go through that all night long, but I will make some progress. The cost of this measure is highly regressive and the Conservatives are not alone in voicing concerns. Industry bodies, including the Association of Convenience Stores, UKHospitality and the British Soft Drinks Association, have raised objections to the cost of the scheme and its implementation. But it is not just business: the Scottish Government have also raised substantial concerns. More tellingly, the Minister’s Labour colleagues in Wales have announced that they will pursue their own separate scheme. How astonishing—nice to see two Labour-led Governments working so very well together! I was not entirely clear what the situation was in respect of Northern Ireland, notwithstanding the Minister’s attempt to clarify that, but she certainly conceded in her remarks from the Dispatch Box that the schemes will not be interoperable on day one. Well, 16 million people live within 50 miles of the border. For businesses, it is unconscionable that they are compelled to deliver multiple schemes in multiple areas without any guarantee or clarity about interoperability. I read in the weekend papers that all Ministers received a note instructing them to cease anti-growth measures. The Minister and her colleagues will have an abundance of anti-growth measures to pick from. In fact, I cannot think of a single measure or policy that this Government have so far put forward that is at all pro-growth. In respect of this particular measure, it seems as if her Department did not read that memo, or if they did, they simply did not understand what it meant. The country needs a Government who focus on doing their key functions well rather than rolling out more red tape, however well intentioned. As the official Opposition, it is our responsibility to speak up for businesses and our constituents when the Government get it wrong. The Conservative party is under new management and we are unafraid to champion those who take risks, generate wealth and create the prosperity to pay for the public services that those on the Labour Benches are so keen on funding so well. The United Kingdom has a strong and proud record on recycling and the environment, building on work undertaken by the previous Conservative Government, but circumstances have changed or have been changed by this Government, and when the facts change, so too must our policies. Businesses are currently being subjected to a barrage of anti-growth measures and policies, destroying investment, jobs and growth. This policy is, I am afraid, the wrong scheme at the wrong time. For that reason, those on the Conservative Benches will be opposing today’s statutory instrument.

Order. Members will have seen that the debate is oversubscribed, so I am going to impose an immediate four-minute time limit, with the exception of Front Benchers.

17:58:00

I commend the previous Government for much of the work they did. I commend the fact that they put in place the Environment Act 2021. I do so because it is really important that we adopt a bipartisan approach to these matters. When we are talking about the environment and climate change, yes in this Chamber we can have some political point scoring occasionally, but it is much more important that we create the bipartisan platform that means successive Governments can build and work from it. I commend the Minister for introducing the measure so quickly. It is long overdue, and it will make an appreciable difference. I would love to know by exactly how many kilograms of residual waste per capita it will reduce our output, but given that each of us is producing 577 kg of residual waste every year, which is over half a tonne—and some of that is toxic waste—it is very important that we get on with this job. Just a month ago we saw a report from the Office for Environmental Protection which showed very clearly that we are not on track to meet the targets set in the Environment Act 2021 by 2042. Although I commend the Government for the action that they are taking now and the urgency with which they have got on with this measure, I want to quote what the report said under the heading “Progress in the reporting period”, which was 2023-24: “The scale and pace of actions does not align with the challenge. While flagship waste management policies have been developed, their introduction has been delayed and they largely focus on end-of-pipe action. There is a lack of action focused on circular economy.” I am delighted that the Minister is introducing this measure and I commend the Government for doing so, but we need even more, and we need it more quickly.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

18:01:00

We Liberal Democrats welcome this initiative from the Government, although in our manifesto we went further and committed ourselves to introducing a deposit return scheme for food and drink bottles and containers. We agree with the Government that a scheme of this kind will foster a nature-positive economy, tackle plastic pollution, and boost recycling efforts across Britain. Such schemes are a proven strategy worldwide to increase recycling while minimising waste and littering: they support our environmental goals while also providing an income stream that will protect our public funds. However, I have some concerns about the scheme’s implementation. The Environment Agency is currently underfunded and struggling to meet its regulatory obligations, particularly in respect of water quality, so we must ensure that this statutory instrument comes with appropriate support and additional funding for the agency to handle this new responsibility effectively. The scheme should also be as convenient as possible for people, whether they are “on the go” or at home, and—as has already been mentioned—small businesses need support in order to transition smoothly into the new system. We must ensure that the introduction of a deposit return scheme does not add to their financial burden. We should be seeking to work with small grocery businesses and convenience retailers to help them to introduce the scheme in an affordable way. I urge the Government to operate a joint scheme throughout the United Kingdom. The Food & Drink Federation has called for a joined-up scheme across the UK, and only this morning I attended a roundtable event on the future of recycling where it was agreed that different schemes in different parts of the UK would make it extremely difficult for those in the industry. They operate throughout the UK, and it would not be viable for them to sell different products in the devolved nations; moreover, they have no control over which parts of the UK their products would be sold or deposited in. A can of soft drink purchased in Bristol should be deposited in the same way as one purchased in Cardiff. A single UK scheme, aligned in scope, fees, processes and labelling, is essential to minimise costs and prevent confusion—and, in that context, it is important that we learn the lessons of the Scottish deposit return scheme. We must also consider the important role that local authorities will play in making the scheme work successfully, and ensure that they are properly supported. That too has been mentioned during the debate. Many local authorities collect from the kerbside in bins or boxes, where recycling is co-mingled and then sent on to another company, which sorts and separates the recycled materials. The cost to local authorities for this service depends on whether items can be recycled for a profit by such companies: if they can make a profit from the items that people recycle, councils will be charged less. Some councils now worry that dry and mixed recycling will become less valuable if cans are included in the deposit return scheme, which will lead to higher costs for local authorities, whose resources are already stretched. So far, DEFRA has committed to work to understand the impact of the DRS on local authorities, and I hope that it will be fully considered. The Liberal Democrats welcome the introduction of the deposit return scheme. We have some reservations about its implementation, but it is a positive step towards a more sustainable and green future.

18:05:00

I am very proud that Beatson Clark manufactures glass right in the heart of my constituency and has done so for 270 years; it employs 200 people directly and a further 2,000 in the supply chain. Glass can be recycled almost infinitely. Currently, almost 74% of glass is recycled, and 80% of that comes from kerbside collections. I recently met representatives of Beaston Clark and British Glass, and they all expressed grave concerns about the impact of this Government’s current policies on the glass sector. DEFRA’s latest figures show that the number of glass containers placed on the market in 2024 was 23% lower than earlier estimates. With increased pressure from imported glass, the outlook for UK manufacturers is indeed grim. UK glass manufacturers are already under severe pressure. The failure to introduce tariffs on imported glass, predominantly from Turkey, has left the industry facing punishing competition from overseas producers, who have significantly lower energy costs and no carbon charges. Although the move towards a circular economy as part of environmental improvements is laudable, it will ultimately be futile if the outcome is dependent on foreign imports, with no environmental impact mitigations in place. Can the Minister confirm whether imported glass will face the same EPR, and who will be liable to pay it?

My hon. Friend raised this issue with me prior to the debate. I have checked with my officials, and I am happy to confirm that the person who places the product—regardless of whether it is made in the UK or purchased from abroad—on the market will be responsible for paying the EPR fees on glass bottles.

I rise happier than when I sat down. I thank the Minister for clarifying that. The sector has legitimate concerns that the DRS will lead to poor environmental outcomes, with less recycled glass going back for remelt, as it will likely be crushed in the process, thus rendering it unsuitable for its purpose. The DRS could also cause storage and safety issues for both consumers and retailers, especially smaller shops. The Republic of Ireland did not include glass in its scheme. It is important to point out that the DRS is not a reuse scheme; it is a collection scheme. Many people reminisce about the UK’s old deposit scheme, but that was a deposit refill scheme, which is completely different from the proposed DRS. Wales has achieved a 90% glass collection rate from kerbside collections without the need for DRS, and is ranked second in the world for recycling. Following the Welsh Government’s recent announcement that they will withdraw from the four-nations DRS and re-examine its scope, it seems to me and many others that the scheme will be ineffective across the UK. Will the Minister tell us what consideration has been given to the Welsh blueprint for collection, which would be the simplest way to improve recycling rates? Given that local authorities receive money from the extended producer responsibility, it is a shame that the Government are not encouraging them to use it to improve collection quality. The glass sector supports the principle behind the extended producer responsibility, but it sees the excessively high EPR fees on glass packaging as punishment for speaking out. The arrangement in Germany is often cited, including by DEFRA, as a good example of an EPR scheme, yet its glass fee is more than 10 times lower than the UK’s, at €28 per tonne. According to the indicative figures recently announced by DEFRA, the fee will be £240 per tonne in the UK. In my discussions with the Minister last Monday, she confirmed that the final EPR figures were unlikely to be finalised until June. How is a business meant to budget on that basis? I urge her to take a serious look at the indicative figures to see if they can be reduced dramatically; otherwise, we will lose the most recyclable sector. Currently, per unit, glass is facing significantly higher fees than less recyclable, less circular materials. That goes against everything that other Government policies are trying to achieve, and I ask the Minister if they are really confident that the EPR policy and other waste policies will lead to more recyclable packaging in the UK. Further, the delay to the DRS means that there is a two-and-a-half-year period when glass beverage containers will be paying EPR fees while competing beverage containers will not, due to being in the DRS. Put bluntly, this Government are driving businesses towards less recyclable packaging such as plastic in those two and a half years. It was never intended that EPR would be in place before the DRS, and this leaves glass at a huge competitive disadvantage in the beverage market, which makes up 80% of the glass market. Given the history and the uncertainty that still exists around the DRS, it is vital that all materials pay EPR fees until the DRS is fully functional, to create a level playing field for all beverage packaging. There is a backstop for 2028, but can I ask the Minister to clarify whether the backstop fees will be backdated to April this year when EPR launches?

18:11:00

The Welsh food and drink sector is one of the flourishing parts of the Welsh economy, and it is home to nearly 230,000 much-needed jobs in Wales. Many of those businesses are located in my constituency, and I am fortunate that many of them also come to the Royal Welsh Show in Builth Wells every July to show their wares in the food hall. Many of those businesses are great examples of rural entrepreneurship. They create jobs in places that seriously need them. I welcome the deposit return scheme, as do the Liberal Democrats, but we are listening to the concerns of people in the industry, particularly in areas such as mine, who have great reservations about the impact on the Welsh food and drink sector of having a scheme that does not work across all four nations. I therefore call on the Government to work closely with the Welsh Government to ensure that we do not have a situation whereby extra costs are imposed on Welsh businesses to sell into England and the rest of the United Kingdom, and likewise that we do not have a situation in a couple of years’ time in which big manufacturers will not manufacture things for the Welsh market because the extra costs are too heavy to bear. I again welcome the introduction of a deposit return scheme and lament the fact that the Conservatives never did this when they had plenty of opportunity.

18:12:00

As chair of the Tidy Britain all-party parliamentary group, I want to thank you for allowing me to speak in this debate, Madam Deputy Speaker. The APPG and Keep Britain Tidy have worked on this issue for years, including under the chairship of my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater). It is exciting to finally see change being delivered in today’s regulations, and I congratulate the Minister on her speedy and no-nonsense approach to making this happen. I frequently visit local schools and when I ask the children what they would like to see changed in Ealing Southall, they always say they want less litter on the streets. Adults complain about litter all the time, of course, but I had not realised how much children were disturbed by it. Litter makes places feel unloved and it makes the people who live in those places feel unloved too. It makes it embarrassing to ask friends around to your house, and it is a daily reminder that your street and your family just do not matter. Over the last 14 years, the amount of litter on our streets has gone up by a third: a tsunami of litter created by the previous Conservative Government, who slashed the funding for local councils to the bone. Councils such as my own in Ealing were left having to spend about two thirds of their budget on adult and children’s social care, with very little left for anything else. They had to make impossible decisions: spend money on potholes or libraries; on playgrounds or parking; on street sweepers or youth workers. They were left to rely on local volunteer litter pickers such as LAGER Can in Ealing, who do an amazing job, but they cannot do it alone. It is great that this new Labour Government have increased funding for local councils, and I am confident that the Chancellor’s spending review in the spring will allow councils to plan services better, but let us be honest that picking up litter after people is a total waste of money. That money could be much better spent on more playgrounds or youth clubs. The real solution is to stop the litter in the first place. What if people were rewarded for recycling their litter instead of dropping it on the street? What if they got money back? That is exactly what this Labour Government are doing today. We are making recycling pay. These new rules mean that shops across the country will be fitted out with reverse vending machines that give people money back for their used plastic bottles and cans. I have tried out the machine in the shop beside my mum’s house in Ireland, and it is simple and easy to use. People feed in their empties, and they get a voucher for their money back. Since being introduced in Ireland in February last year, reverse vending machines have already increased recycling and reduced litter on the streets. Right now, bins in streets, parks and beaches across the UK are chock-full of empty plastic bottles and cans. Think what a difference it would make if all those bottles and cans went back to the shop instead. We would end the problem of overflowing bins on the high street forever. In Ealing, a massive 41% of all reported fly-tips are black sack fly-tips containing household waste such as empty plastic bottles and cans, so making recycling pay would also reduce fly-tipping. The previous Government knew that this made sense as long ago as 2017, but they dithered, delayed and fought among themselves. Today, we have seen a total U-turn, with Conservative Members fighting against their own policy. Again, they prove that they are on the side of the vested interests, the polluters and the litter bugs. Two schools in my constituency came to see me this week, and they said that this makes sense and will reduce litter on the streets. Even the children know that this is the right thing to do. Today we are ending the Conservative record of dither and delay, and their deplorable refusal to do anything about so many communities that feel neglected and uncared for. The only way to get rid of litter on our streets is to stop people dropping it in the first place. This new plan to make recycling pay will help clean up our streets and parks, our rivers and beaches, and put money back in people’s pockets.

18:16:00

None of us is against the idea of recycling and reusing, and it is important that we have a plan of action to do that. However, in the light of the questions I have asked about what is happening back home, my concern is that we do not know exactly what Northern Ireland’s input into the process will be. It seems that there is none. The idea of a deposit return scheme is not new. When I was a child, which was not yesterday, the Maine man brought fizzy drinks to our door. My parents were extremely displeased if we children smashed the bottles, in which case the money would not come back for their recycling—we understood that we would be in trouble. That scheme worked, and it is the kind of scheme we would like to see. We need to reuse bottles, and we can do that only with co-operation and buy-in from the general public. My local church and others have raised funds to run their Campaigner clans and missionary projects by asking their congregations and kids to bring in drinks cans. They industriously hoover the roads to collect the cans, which they crush and bring to the Bryson recycling scheme in Belfast for cash. The money raised is sent to the missionaries in Swaziland and is used for Campaigner clan equipment. Though the scheme ran for a set period, the church has continued to do it. There are many such schemes in Northern Ireland. The Minister knows that I am fond of her, and I am not here to cast any aspersions or cause any hassle, but we understand that 12 billion plastic bottles and 14 billion drinks cans are sold in the United Kingdom each year. We need to consider something different. I thank the civil servants. I am not giving them a hard time, but I want to know the answers to my questions. We need to understand the differences between the Republic of Ireland scheme and the one being proposed here. To use a biblical term, how can oil and water mix, and the water be good enough to drink and the oil good enough to put in a car? My point is that if there are two completely different schemes, with different goals, in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, we need to ensure that the matter is looked at in a sensible way. Our colleagues who are Members of the Legislative Assembly do not know about the scheme either, so we have a very vague system before us. I know that we are all committed to trying to do something better and different. We take our bottles to the bottle bank every week, and the council collects them; and we recycle our plastics and paper through the blue bin system, and we wholeheartedly support that; but there is something very wrong about the Minister bringing forward a scheme that the MLAs in Northern Ireland do not know anything about. I understand that the Minister said that the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs has given DEFRA authority to carry out the scheme, but which Member of the Legislative Assembly gave the go-ahead? Those are my questions. We understand the reasons for the scheme in principle, but it is vague and generalised, and there has not been proper input from the Northern Ireland Assembly.

18:20:00

It is always a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I wholeheartedly support the Minister and the Government on this important matter. I want to highlight a few brief points in the time I have available, and underline the points made by many other Members about the importance of tackling litter, tidying up, making communities seem loved and helping local residents, as well as the important complementary point about protecting wildlife. Bottles and other packaging are a menace to small mammals, fish and other wildlife, and an eyesore in rivers and on the coast. That needs to be tackled, so I wholeheartedly welcome the measures. I will cover three points: I will discuss an aspect of the difficult work under way to tackle the problem of litter, highlight the growing scale of the challenge of litter, and underline the importance of behaviour change, which is rightly at the heart of the Government’s policy. May I, like other Members, say a few words of thanks to the wonderful volunteers and organisations in my area that carry out admirable work to deal with litter? Much of that work is completely unpaid and unrewarded in any financial way, but it gives people a huge sense of wellbeing, and they have the support and understanding of their communities for tackling litter. Keep Caversham Tidy is a local group set up by a group of friends during the pandemic. Since then, it has flourished, and I had the pleasure of going out to help the group. Its work illustrates the practical problems that local authorities and voluntary groups face. When we were clearing up in Christchurch Meadows in Caversham, near the River Thames in Reading, we could see a lot of deeply embedded waste, including drinks cans and bottles, buried behind park benches and logs in the large park. That litter could have caused damage to wildlife, and it was an eyesore and a menace to residents using the park. There was also a risk of it getting into the River Thames, and once waste is in a river, it can travel out to sea and cause untold damage there. Good work is undertaken by many local groups in the Reading area, particularly by Katesgrove Community Association, which has dealt with two fly-tipped piles of rubbish in the last couple of days, despite the cold weather. The work of those volunteers supports the enormous amount of work undertaken by landowners and local authorities. That work is unrelenting. Our council takes the issue extremely seriously. It has driven up the recycling rate to well over 50% and introduced food waste recycling, along with other measures. It will shortly introduce doorstep glass recycling, although some glass will not be covered by the scheme. However, the council struggles enormously because of a whole series of practical problems; I will come to that later. It even has a lorry that drives round Reading constantly picking up fly-tipped waste that is reported. That is the scale of the problem that it is trying to tackle. To give an illustration, I was recently talking to residents in Waldeck Street, near Whitley Street council estate in Reading, and we could see piles of fly-tipped rubbish, including household waste, bottles and other forms of packaging. There is a link, as was highlighted earlier, between fly-tipping and drinks cartons and containers. The Minister is on the right path in giving people an incentive to recycle, so that waste does not get into the illegal waste stream, including through fly-tipping. The evidence from around the world is really clear. I remember the tail end of the scheme that the hon. Member for Strangford describes; there was an incentive in the UK to return bottles as recently as the 1980s or ’90s. Let us go back to that.

18:25:00

I and the Green party welcome this scheme; however, I am disappointed to see a deposit return scheme that does not include glass. Implementing a deposit return scheme that includes glass is really not unprecedented; it is absolutely possible. In fact, there are around 50 schemes around the world, 46 of which include glass. The remaining four do not, but that is only because there is a separate glass scheme. While I welcome the progress, which I am sure will help, will the Government look at this again, and work closely with the Welsh Government to see how glass can be included? On a tangentially related note, I want to quickly respond to the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith), who appears to have stepped out of the Chamber. Since my response to him earlier, a resident of Brighton and Hove has been in touch—the hon. Member may regret having raised this—to explain that the 25-year private finance initiative deal that Brighton and Hove council was locked into, which heavily restricted the range of products that could be recycled, was originally brought in by a Labour Administration, but was later extended by a Conservative one.

18:26:00

I wholeheartedly welcome the Government’s commitment to introducing a deposit return scheme. The policy is long overdue and will help us to tackle the rising tide of waste and pollution that has blighted our countryside and our environment for too long. It is a source of great pride to represent Rushcliffe in this House. The borough of Rushcliffe boasts the highest recycling rate in Nottinghamshire, but we know that we can, and must, go further. My constituents care deeply about the environment, and they rightly expect this Government to show ambition and leadership in addressing the waste crisis. The Conservatives first promised a deposit return scheme around 2018—more than six years ago—yet there is nothing to show for it. Their failure has sadly meant that countless plastic bottles, cans and other types of packaging have continued to pollute our streets, rivers and seas. I was fortunate enough to work and spend time in Ireland for 18 months prior to the general election, so I have seen at first hand the deposit return scheme there. In the first few months after implementation, the number of units recycled per month grew from around 2 million to more than 100 million; 630 million containers were recycled in the first 10 months of operation. I hope that we could achieve similar rates of uptake in the UK. By bringing forward a deposit return scheme that works by 2027, not just for the environment but for businesses, consumers and local authorities, this Labour Government will finally deliver what the country needs. We must, as we promised in our manifesto, empower individuals to play their part in a circular economy. For that reason, I welcome the Government’s recent announcement about tighter rules on incinerators. I have written to the Secretary of State about a proposal for an incinerator at Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station in my constituency. The proposal is nearing the end of its planning permission. For many years, local campaign groups have called out their concerns about that project, and I look forward to the Secretary of State’s reply to my letter in due course. The benefits of this scheme are clear. It will collect, recycle and reuse valuable materials that would otherwise end up as waste. It will preserve our countryside, protect wildlife and restore pride in our local communities. Significantly, it will drive economic growth, creating 21,000 green jobs and unlocking more than £10 billion of investment in recycling infrastructure over the next decade. The consequences of inaction—litter-strewn streets, polluted waterways and increased fly-tipping—are all too visible. The deposit return scheme represents a common-sense solution that not only cleans up our environment, but fosters a culture of sustainability and personal responsibility. With this policy, we are not only cleaning up our environment, but charting a course towards a cleaner, greener and more sustainable future. I wholeheartedly support this scheme, and urge all Members to do the same.

18:30:00

Growing up, it was second nature for us to rinse out our milk bottles and put them out for the milkman to collect the next day. It was a very simple system, and it worked. Then came the rise of single-use plastics, and for a while we convinced ourselves that recycling was enough. We felt that as long as we put our plastic bottles in the right bin, they would be dealt with responsibly, but that view completely changed when we discovered what was really happening to some of our exported waste. Britain was the largest exporter of waste to Turkey last year; in 2023, it exported more than 140,000 tonnes. We have also learned that so-called energy from waste plants are producing harmful emissions, much of them from burning plastic waste that could have been reused. I have seen in my east Devon constituency the effect of plastic not making it into the recycling bins at all. The UK goes through an estimated 14 billion plastic bottles every year. They wash up on beautiful beaches in Sidmouth, Seaton and Beer. In 2019, volunteers collecting waste along Devon’s beaches found 12,000 pieces of plastic in one day. Groups such as Sidmouth Plastic Warriors do fantastic work as volunteers to clean up, but they should not have to. Last year, children from Sidmouth primary school created a message-in-a-bottle exhibit, which highlighted the problem of plastic waste in Devon’s seas. Their messages were eye-opening. One child wrote: “I want to swim in the sea with fish, not rubbish.” Another specifically directed her message to MPs, saying: “Whatever you’re doing it’s not enough.” Another simply wrote, “Deeds, not words”. Their words were a powerful reminder, for me at least, that although we must lead, we can also follow the example of other countries. While serving in Germany with the British Army, we found that returning empties to the supermarket was just part of the weekly shop. It became a habit, like taking a reusable bag to the supermarket. When I came back to the UK, I was struck by the difference. In Germany, one rarely sees plastic bottles on the ground. Here, they are in our verges, in our hedgerows and in our waterways. A deposit return scheme will help. By charging a small deposit when a bottle or can is bought and refunding it when the bottle is returned, we are creating an incentive to reuse. However, the decision to exclude glass bottles means that we could miss an opportunity. Glass is one of the most polluting forms of litter. It is dangerous to livestock in the countryside, and to wildlife. In Wales and Scotland, different schemes are being considered, but having varying regulatory regimes in our four nations could bring additional costs and challenges. The hon. Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) asked whether producers might shift from plastic to glass if that meant not incurring costs associated with the introduction of the deposit return scheme, which was an excellent question. If there was that unintended consequence, we could see heavier goods being transported around the country, and increased carbon emissions. Overall, we need a deposit return scheme. Devon’s landscape and coastline need it. This time for half measures is over. We need real action, including on glass, across the whole country.

18:34:00

I welcome the Minister’s commitment to bringing forward the deposit return scheme. In my constituency, we have a dedicated community of volunteer litter pickers who work tirelessly to ensure that our environment is free from litter. However, their job is never-ending. A member of the Castle Donington Litter Wombles visited me recently to highlight the litter issue on the lay-bys of the A453 between Donington services and East Midlands Gateway. In her correspondence to me, she said, “Wombles have litter picked these lay-bys numerous times—and we have picked over 1000 bags from these locations since 2021, but it’s just a thankless task and is extremely disheartening to see them full of litter again within a matter of days.” Everyone in the Chamber will have a group of dedicated volunteers litter picking in their communities, and we owe a great deal of thanks to them. We need to act to help them reduce the level of litter locally, but we face a growing environmental crisis and there must be an end in sight. Keep Britain Tidy has found that small plastic bottles and non-alcoholic cans make up 43% of all litter. Single-use plastic is polluting our communities. A lot of that plastic never reaches the recycling plant; it is dropped on the floor, put in the wrong bin or tossed out the window on the motorway. The Conservative Government promised a deposit return scheme for recycling bottles and consistently delayed its introduction, but when this Labour Government say we are committed to cleaning up our streets, parks, rivers and oceans, we mean it. The deposit return scheme will provide an incentive for people to keep our streets clean and will make us all conscious of the plastic we use. When Germany implemented a scheme—gosh, a couple decades ago—it reported a 98% return rate, showing the potential we have here. Meanwhile, in this country, a National Highways survey last year found that 63% of people had seen somebody discarding litter out the window on the side of an A-road or motorway. That has a devastating impact on our wildlife: the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has received more than 10,000 reports of animals found injured, trapped or dead in discarded litter over the past three years. Highways and busy roads are far too dangerous for our volunteers to venture on to, and they should not have to. Keeping our environment clean is a collective responsibility. We have to start at the source, and I am pleased that we have a Government who are finally taking action and delivering on our environmental commitments. Introducing the deposit return scheme will kick-start an economy-wide transformation in our relationship with the resources we use and on tackling waste, but it would be useful if the Minister outlined how convenience stores in rural constituencies such as mine will play their part and how they will ensure that all retailers can get involved in the scheme. I am grateful to have a Government who recognise the need to encourage people to recycle, reduce their waste and make more sustainable choices, which will go a long way towards protecting and preserving our planet for this generation and those to come.

18:37:00

I welcome the regulations, which are as important as they are long overdue. I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for the zeal she has brought to her role in ensuring that after several years of dither and delay, we finally have a Bill to bring this important measure forward. For far too long, we as a society have not grappled with the blights of plastic pollution and litter. With over 75% of the litter across our high streets made up of the type of drink bottles we are talking about, the measure will be an important way of tackling issues that we know our communities care about. Fantastic local groups such as Plastic Free Hitchin and Shefford, litter picking associations and other community groups in my constituency play their part, doing everything they can to keep my community and the countryside clear of litter. We owe it to them to ensure that as a Government we do our bit, too. Back in 2018, the previous Government confirmed that they were looking at the idea of such a measure, so it is a matter of great regret that we have waited so many years for one and that the Opposition have provided little support for it today. That lost time should not just be cause for embarrassment, as we have seen so many other countries stealing a run on the measure and introducing a scheme that has been shown to work in jurisdiction after jurisdiction. That failure is literally littered all across our countryside. The paths that make my community so special and our rivers, lakes, oceans and beaches that we are all so proud of as a country are littered with plastic pollution that could have been tackled had the measure been brought forward earlier. We know that where similar schemes have been introduced across the world there have been real benefits. There have been dramatic increases in returns—90% and above is quite typical for such plastic return schemes, but the current rate for our kerbside collection scheme is just 70%. We can ensure that we are doing more to improve circularity and the collection of virgin plastic so that we have the high-quality supply stream for recyclability that the industry is crying out for—that is why the Food & Drink Federation supports the measure. And we can ensure that we tackle littering, to address the issues that are blighting too many of our communities. Given the need to act at pace, which was so lacking under the previous Government, I absolutely understand why we are focusing on important quick wins. However, it would be remiss of me not to address a wider recycling issue in my community that I have raised several times with the Minister: metal recycling. Five times in the last year, people in Hitchin have woken up to plumes of smoke and possible contamination in the air, as time and again local metal recycling plants have caught fire, often triggered by lithium-ion batteries making their way into the waste source. By working together—and trying to knock heads together—between councils, the Environment Agency and other authorities with a remit, we are looking to make progress, but there is clearly also a case for national action to ensure that the Environment Agency has the powers it needs to address that problem at source, and that we have wider measures on the recycling of lithium-ion batteries to reduce the risk of their ending up as contaminants in metal recycling in the first place. I will continue to press the Minister on that, but I know from my conversations with her that she is alive to the risks in that space. I hope that, over the course of this Parliament, we can deliver real change on that, too. In the meantime, I am incredibly proud to support this important measure. Ensuring that we learn from the successes and challenges facing other jurisdictions will be important, as will ensuring that we have the right level of deposits, the right infrastructure in place, and the right support for smaller retailers to take part in the scheme.

I thank my hon. Friend for his excellent speech. He makes a valid point about the importance of the measures not only for the environment but for business and retailers. Does he agree that this legislation, which is, as he points out, absolutely overdue, will benefit not only the environment and our wombles—we also have some in Harlow—but business, too?

Absolutely. It will be important to establish close collaboration to ensure that the scheme is as effective as possible. There is a reason the Food & Drink Federation supports the measures: without them, it will not have the supply of high-quality recycled plastics needed to hit the targets that it is so keen to hit and is often already committed to. Without the legislation, those targets become almost impossible. I will conclude my remarks by building on those of my hon. Friend the Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner), who highlighted the historical importance of good cross-party consensus and the importance of climate and nature issues. For a long time, this measure had cross-party support, and it is deeply regrettable that that does not seem to be the case today. I take some heart from the Conservatives’ lack of enthusiasm to leap in and speak bombastically about their newfound opposition to the measures, which I hope is a sign that there may be space in the coming months to work more collaboratively to ensure that we support the measures to be as effective as possible. I am incredibly grateful to the Minister for lending me her ear on the important issue of metal recycling in Hitchin, and for the leadership that she has shown on this legislation, which will make a real difference for my community and those across the country. It is about time that we lead on making it a reality.

I call the Minister.

18:42:00

What a tour de force this has been across the House, apart from the tumbleweed silence of the official Opposition. Where are the former DEFRA Ministers, having been muscled out of this debate? Where is the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore), who, as late as April 2024, was speaking enthusiastically about how he was moving ahead with implementing a deposit return scheme for single-use drinks containers by October 2027? They are missing in action—the long-term view muscled out for a short-term hit of political opposition. I am old enough to remember when the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith) was a Minister. Presumably he signed off on the write-round on the Environment Act 2021, which introduced the enabling legislation for many of the reforms that we are bringing in. Amnesia seems to be a rather convenient illness among the Conservative Front Benchers. Let me answer some of the points raised in the debate. My hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern) asked about metals. I hope that we will not have to wait for a whole Parliament before we make progress on tackling the issues in the metals and tyres recycling business. As he is aware, we have also banned single-use vapes to tackle the battery fires they cause. I will work with other Ministers across Government to consider how to tackle the growing problem of lithium battery fires. Glass is excluded from the DRS in England, Northern Ireland and Scotland. The Government’s position is that glass would add considerable up-front cost and create complex challenges for the delivery of the DRS, particularly in the hospitality and retail sectors, as well as disproportionately impacting small breweries. It would be inconvenient for consumers due to its weight and its potential for breakage in transit to a return point. Glass drinks containers across the UK are included in the extended producer responsibility for packaging scheme to ensure they are efficiently and effectively recycled, and the glass recycling targets within that scheme have been increased from 83% by 2030 to 85%. We are also considering how reuse systems could be developed in the future, and I have met representatives of the drinks industry in the last fortnight to discuss that. We will not let the perfect be the enemy of the good when bringing in these regulations. On Wales, waste is a devolved issue. How a future scheme works in Wales will be for Welsh Government Ministers to determine, and we will continue to work with devolved Governments and industry as we progress the DRS.

Will the Minister give way?

I am going to finish my points, and if there is time at the end, I will take interventions. We are very short of time. Turning to material switching, a 2023 report from Reloop and the Container Recycling Institute considered numerous international examples of introductions and expansions of a DRS, and concluded that there was no evidence of this causing an observed decline in sales of in-scope products. On small retailers, we have engaged with retail—as I said earlier—and we can confirm that retail premises under 100 square metres in an urban area will be automatically exempt from the DRS retailer obligations, which will support some of the smallest retailers. Although those retailers larger than 100 square metres will be required to host a return point, they will be able to determine whether a manual return point or a small reverse vending machine would be best for their store style, with support from the DMO. Evidence from other areas that have introduced these schemes shows that some very small retailers enjoy hosting returns and are keen to experience the additional footfall they bring. On local authorities, there will be new burdens funding for trading standards, and the DRS will collect at least 90% of containers by year 3. This will have a varying impact on local authorities: they will miss out on the sales of materials, but will make savings of around £30 million from having to collect less litter, so I think we will see a positive impact there. On incinerators, the residual waste capacity note that we published on 30 December shows that there are certain areas in England where significant volumes of household waste are still sent to landfill, and we landfill far too much non-household waste. Disposing of waste in landfill has a greater negative environmental impact than recovering energy through incineration, but this does not take away from our commitment to minimise residual waste. The new conditions we have set out will support economic growth and will drive our push to net zero and our plan for change. Turning to interoperability in Northern Ireland, the scheme will of course be interoperable across England, Scotland and Northern Ireland, but although there is a separate scheme in the Republic of Ireland—

On that point, will the Minister give way?

No, I am going to make my point and then give way at the end if there is time. Although there is a separate scheme in the Republic of Ireland, these regulations allow the DMO to work with other scheme administrators, such as Re-Turn in the Republic of Ireland. That means that once the scheme is established, its administrators have the option of collectively developing operational solutions and creating alignment for the benefit of consumers in both countries. Officials have visited the Republic of Ireland and speak regularly to Re-Turn, so the opportunities to work together, to align and to learn from Ireland are there, and they are very positive. I will ensure that Members of the Legislative Assembly are invited, and I am very happy to keep the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) informed. On regulator costs—an issue that was raised by the Liberal Democrat Front-Bench spokesperson, the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse)—the Environment Agency will be funded for its regulatory costs by the DMO. There are checks and balances in place to ensure that this is proportionate. In conclusion, we are hearing the same circular arguments from the Conservatives. Their Government talked but did not act, and they allowed dither and delay to dog the reforms. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack) how depressing it is for local litter groups to have to step in and pick up the pieces where Conservative cuts have resulted in cuts to street sweeping and cleaning. Frankly, theirs is a Herculean task that should not be necessary, but they are cleaning out the Augean stables. Today is the beginning of the end of that community clear-up. We are literally throwing money into the gutter, and hearing the same old attack lines being recycled, although by different shadow Ministers, to be fair—there are fresh faces. This is not the end of litter, but it is the beginning of the end of litter in this country. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) for taking the time to listen to the next generation who will benefit from these reforms. I, too, wish to swim with the fish, not with rubbish. I, too, am a believer in deeds, not words. On the Opposition Benches, Conservative Members love to talk; on this side of the House, we love to do. That is the difference a Labour Government will make. Question put.

90|18:51|352|75|The House divided:|Question accordingly agreed to.||0|0

That the draft Deposit Scheme for Drinks Containers (England and Northern Ireland) Regulations 2024, which were laid before this House on 25 November 2024, be approved.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Speaker and the Deputy Speakers have been helpful and generous in allowing us to raise the case, using various parliamentary mechanisms, of Mr Alaa Abd el-Fattah, a British citizen who is still imprisoned in Egypt. I understand that the Foreign Secretary is to visit Egypt either tomorrow or the day after. Have you heard, Madam Deputy Speaker, whether there may be a written or oral statement from the Foreign Office about the Foreign Secretary raising Mr el-Fattah’s case, insisting upon his release or at least seeking a visit to this British citizen in prison? It is a matter of urgency, because his mother is now beyond the 100th day of hunger strike, and I fear for her life.

I am grateful to the right hon. Member for giving notice of his point of order. I have had no indication that the Foreign Secretary intends to come to the House to make a statement, but I am sure that the Table Office will be able to advise him on how he might pursue the matter further.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wish to correct the record following my intervention on the New Homes (Solar Generation) Bill on Friday. I said: “Regulations were due to come into force in 2016 that would have required all new homes to have zero carbon standards. Those regulations were scrapped by the coalition Government.”—[Official Report, 17 January 2025; Vol. 760, c. 631.] In fact, regulations that would have required all new homes to have zero carbon standards were due to come into force in 2016, but they were watered down by the coalition Government in 2014, and the requirement for all new homes to have zero carbon standards was scrapped. What was left of the watered-down regulations was subsequently scrapped by the following Conservative Government in 2015.

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving notice of his point of order and for placing his correction of his earlier statement on the record.

Further to the point of order made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), in the absence of any statement or urgent question being granted on the visit that the Foreign Secretary is hopefully making to Egypt on the fate of British prisoner Alaa Abd el-Fattah, and given the very serious condition of his mother—an academic from Sussex who is on a hunger strike and only taking water, and who a number of Members met today—can you advise, Madam Deputy Speaker, on what other ways we can impress upon the Foreign Secretary the urgency of this issue? Every single day matters in what could be a life or death situation for his mother.

I believe that my earlier response to the similar point of order offered enough information, but no doubt by raising the point again, Ministers on the Front Bench will have heard again. The hon. Member’s point is on the record.

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I am here for the next motion and as the Leader of the House responsible for statements to this House, let me reassure Members that I will raise this issue with the Foreign Secretary, who is very forthcoming—he has been to the House twice in the past week to make statements to keep the House updated. I am sure that he will want to keep the House updated on his conversations in Egypt and elsewhere, and I will ensure that the points of order have been heard.

I thank the Leader of the House for a great response to those two points of order.