The Bench Report

Unpacking Solutions to Plastic Pollution & Building a Circular Economy

• The Bench Report • Season 3 • Episode 7

Share episode

There is an urgent need for a Global Plastics Treaty to tackle pervasive plastic pollution, projected to triple by 2060. A legally binding international agreement is crucial, addressing plastic throughout its lifecycle. Key themes include prioritizing reducing virgin plastic production over relying on inefficient recycling. We discuss the invisible threat of microplastics and the significant influence of the fossil fuel industry in negotiations. The debate emphasizes moving towards a circular economy and the UK's role in championing ambitious global targets.

Key Takeaways:

  • Global plastic production is projected to triple by 2060 if no action is taken.
  • The UN Global Plastics Treaty seeks a legally binding agreement to end plastic pollution worldwide.
  • Reducing plastic production is vital; recycling alone is insufficient, with much UK waste exported or incinerated.
  • Microplastics are a widespread, invisible threat, harming health and ecosystems.
  • Fossil fuel and plastics industries actively lobby against strong treaty measures, acting as a significant barrier.
  • Transitioning to a circular economy, focused on reuse and improved design, is essential for long-term solutions.
  • The UK supports ambitious, verifiable targets and aims to lead international efforts in the negotiations.

Important Concepts:

  • Global Plastics Treaty: A proposed legally binding international agreement to tackle plastic pollution globally.
  • Circular Economy: An economic model aiming to eliminate waste by keeping products and materials in use longer through reuse, repair, and recycling.
  • Microplastics: Tiny, often invisible, plastic fragments found everywhere, harming health and environment.

Discussion Question: How can governments and civil society counter industry lobbying to ensure a robust Global Plastics Treaty is finalized?

Source: Global Plastics Treaty
Volume 771: debated on Thursday 17 July 2025

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Subscribe to our Substack for in depth analysis of debates past and present.

Shape our next episode or article! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: thebenchreportuk@gmail.com

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus and extended episodes + more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0....

Ivan:

Hello and welcome again to The Bench Report. Concise summaries of debates and briefings from the benches of the UK Parliament. A new topic every episode. You're listening to Amy and Ivan.

Amy:

Today we're discussing the critical issue of plastic pollution following a timely debate in the UK Parliament.

Ivan:

That's right. And with the next round of UN Global Plastics Treaty talks scheduled for August 5th to 14th in Geneva, members of parliament recently came together.

Amy:

They did, to discuss the path forward, emphasizing actually a cross-party consensus on this vital matter.

Ivan:

So let's start with the scale of it, because the numbers are just staggering.

Amy:

They really are. The world produces over 460 million tons of plastic each year.

Ivan:

460 million.

Amy:

And projections suggest this could triple by 2060 if no significant action is taken.

Ivan:

Triple. And what about ending up in our environment?

Amy:

Annually, we're talking about 11 to 12 million tons of plastic entering our oceans.

Ivan:

It's hard to even picture that amount. For people in coastal communities, maybe like Orkney and Shetland mentioned in the debate, this isn't abstract, is it?

Amy:

Not at all. They've seen the growth of plastic pollution directly over the years. It's gone from perhaps a novelty find on the beach in childhood to beaches now just overwhelmed with small plastic pieces. And that's despite community cleanup efforts like Orkney's Bag the Brook or Shetland's Devor Redup.

Ivan:

So it's not just the big visible items. You mentioned small pieces, microplastic.

Amy:

Exactly. That's the really insidious part. These tiny fragments, smaller than a grain of rice, they are ubiquitous, found from ocean depths to mountain peaks.

Ivan:

And wildlife.

Amy:

Wildlife eats them. It disrupts their feeding. It damages their organs. And these microplastics, well, they spread through food chains right into our own bodies.

Ivan:

Into us. How?

Amy:

There are estimates, for instance, of human intake from eating mussels ranging from 9,000 to maybe 12,000 microplastic items per person per year.

Ivan:

That's alarming.

Amy:

And scientists at Bangor University found something else, that ocean warming combined with microplastics could severely damage marine ecosystems. That impacts food security for everyone.

Ivan:

Was there a specific moment this really hit public consciousness?

Amy:

Many point to Sir David Attenborough's Blue Planet series. It seems to have been a tipping point.

Ivan:

And that led to international agreement.

Amy:

Yes. In 2022, 175 countries agreed to develop a legally binding instrument against plastic pollution, which brings us back to the current treaty talks.

Ivan:

So there's consensus in parliament, strong support for this global treaty. But what's the core disagreement on how to fix it?

Amy:

The main contention seems to be around this idea that recycling alone can solve the problem.

Ivan:

While production keeps growing.

Amy:

Exactly. While production continues to grow exponentially, some MPs termed this view downright disingenuous, particularly coming from parts of the plastics and petrochemical industries.

Ivan:

Why disingenuous?

Amy:

Because they know the difficulty of actually recycling the sheer diversity of plastics. plastic polymers effectively. Look at the UK figures around 600 million kilograms of plastic exported for recycling last year.

Ivan:

But we don't know if it actually gets recycled.

Amy:

There's huge uncertainty about its fate. Often it seems ending up dumped or incinerated overseas and incineration itself is a growing issue. The number of incinerators in the UK has jumped from 38 to 52 in just five years largely driven by plastic growth. This contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and releases toxic fumes.

Ivan:

So the argument is recycling is part of it, but not the whole solution.

Amy:

Precisely. The real solution, according to many in the debate, has to involve tackling production, a cap on production.

Ivan:

Okay. A cap. So thinking about the global treaty, what would a good treaty actually look like? What needs to be in it?

Amy:

Well, drawing from groups like the Environmental Investigation Agency and Greenpeace, several key things stand out. First, a global target to reduce the production of primary or virgin plastic polymers.

Ivan:

Right. The new stuff made from fossil fuels.

Amy:

Yes. Second, clear, legally binding obligations to phase out the most harmful plastic products and chemicals.

Ivan:

Makes sense.

Amy:

Third, binding obligations to improve product design really Pushing for reuse and ensuring minimal environmental impact.

Ivan:

And financing, especially for less wealthy nations.

Amy:

Crucial, ambitious finance mechanisms, particularly for our least developed countries and small island developing states who are disproportionately affected.

Ivan:

That sounds comprehensive.

Amy:

Yeah.

Ivan:

But you mentioned industry earlier. Is there significant pushback?

Amy:

Oh, absolutely. The challenge posed by the plastics industry is huge. It's, well, exceptionally well resourced and very closely tied to the oil and gas industry.

Ivan:

How does that play out in negotiations?

Amy:

At the last round of talks in Korea, it was reported that fossil fuel lobbyists would have formed the largest single delegation there.

Ivan:

Larger than countries.

Amy:

Outnumbering, for example, the representatives from all the Pacific small island states combined, two to one.

Ivan:

Wow.

Amy:

There's even been disturbing evidence cited of scientists being threatened on UN premises during these negotiations.

Ivan:

That's deeply concerning. So how can a country like the UK help?

Amy:

The UK delegation is generally considered quite strong, a sort of gold standard. The feeling is they must use this position to support and protect less-resourced nations, campaigners, and scientists.

Ivan:

Bringing it back home then, away from the global stage for a moment, what's happening locally? Are people engaged?

Amy:

Very much so. MPs mentioned receiving many letters from constituents, especially young people, deeply concerned and urging action.

Ivan:

And practical action.

Amy:

Yes. Local groups like the Sidmouth Plastic Warriors cleaning beaches. One report mentioned them collecting an incredible 70 bags of litter in just one outing.

Ivan:

And government action in the UK.

Amy:

There are domestic efforts underway. The ban on disposable plastic vapes, for example. The upcoming deposit return scheme.

Ivan:

That had some issues in Scotland initially, didn't it?

Amy:

It did, but the potential is there. Germany achieved 98% recycling rates with their system. And there's also extended producer responsibility being rolled out.

Ivan:

Making the producers pay for disposal.

Amy:

Essentially, yes. Making them responsible for the product's entire life cycle. It's all part of a bigger shift, hopefully, towards a more circular economy.

Ivan:

Where reuse and repair become the norm, not just disposal.

Amy:

Exactly. And we're seeing innovation, too. Like Natpla, a UK Earthshot Prize winner using seaweed-based alternatives they've already displaced millions of single-use plastic items.

Ivan:

So innovation helps, local action helps, policy helps.

Amy:

But the underlying message from the debate was clear. Voluntary efforts alone have failed. Plastic pollution actually increased by 50% in five years, even as national initiatives grew by 60%.

Ivan:

So the pressure needs to shift.

Amy:

Yes, from consumers, who MPs felt have played their part, back squarely onto the producers.

Ivan:

This discussion really lays bare the clear urgency and the broad consensus for action, but also those powerful vested interests resisting change.

Amy:

It does. As we look towards these crucial treaty negotiations in Geneva, what really stands out is that stark contrast. You have global scientific consensus and huge public demand for deeds, not words.

Ivan:

And on the other side,

Amy:

a strong, extremely well-funded opposition. And this raises a really important question for you listening. How can international agreements truly deliver on their promise when powerful, as always find us

Ivan:

on social media at bench report uk get in touch with any topic important to you

Amy:

remember politics is everyone's business

Ivan:

take

Amy:

care

Podcasts we love

Check out these other fine podcasts recommended by us, not an algorithm.

Parliament Matters Artwork

Parliament Matters

Hansard Society
Pod Save the UK Artwork

Pod Save the UK

Crooked Media