27/10/2026
PLASTIC REDUCTION: A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY OR ANOTHER COST FOR SMALL BUSINESS?
There is no question that we need to reduce our reliance on plastics. Our environment, wildlife and waterways will be better for it.
BUT, just like the recent credit card surcharge debate, why does small business continually find itself bearing the cost and responsibility for unpopular government decisions?
Here in Tamworth, our hospitality and visitor economy is a cornerstone of the regional economy, generating nearly $300 million annually and directly employing more than 1,200 people.
These are the cafés, restaurants, accommodation providers and hospitality businesses that contribute enormously to our region's economic vitality. And they're already navigating rising costs, workforce pressures and increasingly complex regulatory requirements.
Now, under the NSW Government's Environmental Legislation Amendment (Plastic Reduction and Container Recycling) Bill 2026, businesses face further changes to how they operate, what they purchase and how they serve their customers.
But here's our question. Where is the equal emphasis on changing consumer behaviour?
The foundation of any successful business is responding to consumer demand. Customers set expectations, and businesses adapt.
In its own announcement, the NSW Government declared that the days of unnecessary plastics being handed out, "thrown away" and left to pollute our environment are coming to an end.
Surely those two words – thrown away – highlight why consumers must be part of the solution?
Industry associations have already raised legitimate concerns about the financial and logistical pressures on small and medium businesses, including sourcing compliant packaging, managing existing stock and adapting supply chains within tight transition timeframes.
They've also called for greater consumer education and support.
So why does it appear that business is expected to fund the transition, educate the customer AND carry the risk of significant penalties for non-compliance?
Environmental responsibility matters. But so does economic sustainability.
Chamber isn't arguing against reducing plastics. We're arguing for a fairer approach that recognises environmental change requires shared responsibility between government, business AND consumers.
Because when compliance costs rise, those costs don't simply disappear. They ultimately affect business viability, employment, pricing and the consumer experience.
So, let's have the conversation.
Should businesses continue to carry the greatest responsibility for delivering government-mandated change, or is it time for governments to invest just as heavily in changing consumer behaviour?
We'd welcome your thoughts, particularly from our hospitality, tourism and retail operators.
