Plastic lunch box ban uncertainty
Importers grapple with definition and enforcement concerns amid looming ban
IMPORTERS AND distributors of plastic lunch boxes are demanding clarity from Senator Matthew Samuda, the minister with responsibility for the environment, on the looming ban on such containers.
The ban, which is also extended to personalcare products with microplastic beads, will take effect June 1.
Samuda, who is a minister without portfolio in the Ministry of Economic Growth and Job Creation, had initially announced a December 31, 2023, implementation date before pushing back the date.
But many stakeholders told The Gleaner that the new target date caught them off guard.
“These are people’s livelihood. People have to source ... . You can’t just ban something without telling people, ‘We’re going to allow this or allow that’. Clarity would be great ... . People kinda in the dark,” Kevin Homer, co-owner of Einstein Enterprises, told The Gleaner.
Homer started his business five years ago to provide more eco-friendly food-storage options.
When the Government announced a ban on the use of expanded polystyrene foam products in the food and beverage industry in January 2020, Homer said he imported alternatives to take advantage of what he thought would be a burgeoning market. However, not only did he believe that enforcement was lax in the ensuing months, but he said the market rejected his bagasse boxes – a biodegradable product made from sugar cane.
NO DEMAND
“The demand wasn’t there. The consumer didn’t want the bagasse because the gravies were a challenge ... ,” he said. “I sat on biodegradable products for a year before I sold anything.”
This pushed him to also start distributing plastic lunch boxes to restaurants and other small businesses, which now make up between 20 to 30 per cent of his annual revenue.
But after years of not being able to sell the biodegradable boxes, which represent the bulk of his products, Homer is now in the process of closing down his business as his experience does not make him optimistic about the enforcement of the announced ban.
One importer, who did not want to be identified, told The Gleaner that while he understood the importance of a plastic ban to the sustainability of the environment, Samuda’s announcement raised several unanswered questions. This, he said, is affecting his ability to prepare for the ban.
Among the puzzling matters, according to the importer, is the definition of plastic lunch boxes under the ban, pointing out that there are different types of plastic containers in the market, including some that are reusable.
Additionally, he said that there is confusion about whether the ban means that no plastic lunch boxes can be sold after June 1 or whether it means that no importation of such products can take place after that.
Sharing that he has hundreds of cases of plastic lunch boxes in storage, the importer said consideration should be given to the nuances of importing products, noting that it sometimes takes two and half months’ lead time for products to arrive in the island, a situation that could worsen with the Red Sea crisis.
Contending that it is the people who will suffer most from a chaotic execution of the ban, he maintains that a smooth implementation would be critical to its acceptance and success.
With plastic lunch boxes raking in the lion’s share of his revenues, the importer said he had also imported bagasse lunch boxes after the January 2020 ban, but the market did not accept them.
MILLIONS IN LOSS
A third importer, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said the level of uncertainty surrounding the ban is reminiscent of what happened in 2020.
He told The Gleaner that he lost more than $13 million the last time around as the ban was announced after he had imported products. He further contended that promises of compensation from the Government remain unfulfilled and that he was wary that a similar approach could further hurt businesses.
When asked last week whether the ban on plastic lunch boxes would also include reusable plastic boxes such as those used in some restaurants, Samuda told The Gleaner that he could not respond to specific containers. However, he noted that an open-consultation process with the Ministry of Economic Growth and Job Creation, specifically its environmental branch, and the National Environment and Planning Agency would deal with all stakeholders, starting primarily with the import and distributors and then the major users.
“The food and beverage sector, being the quick-service industry, was well aware that this was not the policy intent when we banned styrofoam, which is what they previously used. A loophole existed in the policy. What we are doing is tidying up that loophole,” he said.
Stating that there will be no further delaying the June 1 implementation, he said there would be a consultation process and a publiceducation campaign before the date arrives.
“Other alternatives exist on the international market from a myriad of sources,” he said. “If you looked at the market, three months after the initial ban was all paper-based, recycled paper-based containers that had taken on the market. Return to that point.”