Much ado on bags

THE rollout of plastic bag bans across the nation has not been smooth sailing.

Once the ban kicks in properly, the shopping giants stand to save a fortune if they no longer have the cost of giving away the bags.

If people fail to adjust their habits — forget to bring in old plastic bags or new hessian ones — the supermarket chains will nevertheless have a new source of revenue, charging the customer for individual plastic bags.

At the moment a visit to the shops by those of us who are still forgetting to bring their bags feels like a guilty exercise.

You have to surreptitiously ask what their bag policy is and in hushed tones ask if they can sneak you a couple, like a drinker at a bar wondering if prohibition has kicked in yet.

Some consumers are now even “stockpiling” old bags — getting large amounts of the things for future use.

The humble plastic bag has become not only a sought-after item but an item of controversy — a functional inanimate object that is having environmental politics projected on to it.

You do not have to be a greenie to care about the planet or to dislike the amount of disposable waste we generate as a society. And in time, when everyone gets used to it, the bag bans will lead to less waste of these items that do break down but may never really fully biodegrade. Initiatives that reduce waste that impacts our natural environment such as the “keep cup” movement (which is voluntary) should be welcomed.

But while every little bit helps, companies and governments need to ensure they are not being hypocritical when making demands on individuals they themselves do not meet. Water restrictions, for instance, have a useful place in society — but there need to be alternatives to spreading gallons of fresh drinking water as dust suppressants on road projects at the same time.

Similarly, if the supermarket giants are going to inconvenience or charge customers for using plastic, they should check their packaging meets the same lofty principles.