
Countries under pressure to finalise UN plastic pollution treaty as talks resume
Countries will gather in Geneva, Switzerland, on Tuesday for another attempt to reach a legally binding international agreement on plastics.
The 10-day conference has been organised after negotiators failed to adopt a treaty in November during what was meant to be the final round of talks in South Korea.
Since negotiations began in 2022, countries have struggled to resolve some key issues, resulting in a deadlock that has stalled global efforts to tackle the pollution crisis.
Going into Geneva, the rift between countries persists, with some continuing to push for a less ambitious deal that solely focuses on reducing plastic waste while others want a treaty that addresses the full lifecycle of plastics, including limiting production.
The UK has been part of a 'high ambition coalition' of countries which are calling for binding obligations on reducing production and consumption, sustainable product design, environmentally sound management of plastic waste and clean-up of pollution.
Environment minister Emma Hardy, who will be attending the conference, said: 'Millions of tonnes of plastic flow into our ocean, rivers and lakes each year, washing up on our beaches and littering the seabed; threatening precious habitats and wildlife.
'We urgently need a bold and ambitious global agreement that will end plastic pollution by 2040.
'The UK is continuing to play a leading role in pushing for an effective treaty that ensures the sustainable consumption and production of plastics, tackles problematic plastic products, and paves the way to a circular economy.'
The high ambition coalition includes more than 60 members, such as Canada, France, Germany, Chile, New Zealand and Rwanda.
But Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Kazakhstan have questioned the most ambitious proposals for limiting production, arguing they are incompatible with the treaty's core agenda and could interfere with global trade.
Environmental campaigners have said that progress on tackling pollution has been mired by both obstructions from petrostates as well as lobbying by plastics and petrochemical companies.
Christina Dixon, ocean campaign leader for the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), said: 'This is the make-or-break moment to determine whether countries are capable of coming together, overcoming the pressure to compromise on a weak agreement and stand firm on the level of ambition required.
'The biggest obstacles remain the fact that a small group of countries either don't want a treaty or don't want one that meaningfully addresses the problem of plastic pollution.'
Rudy Schulkind, political campaigner with Greenpeace UK, called the treaty 'our best opportunity to turn off the tap on unnecessary plastic production'.
'Allowing fossil fuels lobbyists and their dirty tactics anywhere near the treaty negotiations is a recipe for disaster – their sole aim is to derail and sabotage the talks on behalf of their profit hungry paymasters,' he said.
'UN member states must stand firm for a strong Global Plastics Treaty.'
Elsewhere, nearly 300 businesses, financial institutions and campaign groups, including Coca-Cola, Mars, Nestle, PepsiCo, SC Johnson, Unilever and Walmart signed an open letter to lead negotiators in June, calling for a robust plastic pollution treaty that includes strong obligations in phase-out, product design and a level playing field for international regulation.
According to Our World in Data, plastic production has increased sharply over the last 70 years and has more than doubled in the last two decades.
The world has gone from producing two million tonnes in 1950 to more than 450 million tonnes today, with its use for daily items such as home appliances and food packaging soaring.
But just 9% of the world's plastic waste is recycled, while 43% is landfilled, 19% is burned and 22% is mismanaged – with the risk it ends up in the countryside, rivers, lakes and oceans, figures from the OECD show.
Once in the environment, plastic waste can entangle, choke or be eaten by wildlife and livestock, clog up waterways and litter beaches, while bigger items break down into microplastics entering food chains.
And producing plastic, primarily from fossil fuel oil, has a climate impact, with the World in Data and OECD saying 3.3% of global emissions is down to the production and management of global plastics.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
9 minutes ago
- Reuters
Russia's seven-month budget deficit exceeds annual target
MOSCOW, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Russia's seven-month budget deficit exceeded the target for the entire year by a quarter, Finance Ministry data showed on Thursday, highlighting the strain of financing the war in Ukraine. U.S. President Donald Trump, who is expected to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in the coming days, said this week that the Russian economy "stinks", and that declining energy prices could pressure Putin to halt the war. The data showed that from January to August this year, Russia ran a budget deficit of 4.9 trillion roubles ($61.44 billion), or 2.2% of gross domestic product. Russia targets a deficit of 1.7% of GDP this year, having tripled it in May, citing falling oil prices and Trump's tariff wars as the main reasons. Last month, the deficit was in line with this target. The ministry reported that expenditures from January to July amounted to 25.19 trillion roubles, an increase of 20.8% compared to the same period last year. Meanwhile, revenues increased by only 2.8% year-on-year to 20.32 trillion roubles. "This is mainly due to the advanced financing of expenses in January of the current year, as well as a decrease in oil and gas revenue inflows," the ministry said, emphasizing that the current figure will not affect the annual target. Russia has been increasing fiscal spending throughout its three and a half years of war in Ukraine to finance the military effort. The Vedomosti business daily cited an unnamed Finance Ministry spokesman this week as saying that the ministry is planning another revision of this year's budget in the autumn. It did not provide any details of the planned revision. The daily also cited Dmitry Gusev, deputy head of the parliament's budget committee, as saying that increased spending was the main reason for the revision. Gusev also mentioned that non-energy revenues were affected by lower investment. The budget's oil and gas revenues - its most important source of cash, slated to account for about 22% of total revenues this year - fell by 27% in July due to lower prices and the strong rouble. Potential new sanctions, flagged by Trump in case Russia does not show any progress towards peace in Ukraine, added pressure on the economy, although the nature of new measures is not yet clear. However, Russia recorded a third consecutive week of deflation on August 6, increasing the possibility of another key rate cut by the central bank in September. A further cut could potentially boost Russia's flagging economic growth. ($1 = 79.7500 roubles)


Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
North Sea giant to move jobs overseas as tax rate hits 111pc
Britain's biggest oil and gas producer is to move skilled jobs out of the UK after windfall taxes left it with an 111pc tax rate. Harbour Energy plans to wind down its North Sea investments and has already announced 250 job losses in Aberdeen, a city once regarded as the oil and gas capital of Europe. On Thursday, a spokesman said the company would be offering jobs in its overseas operations to suitable UK workers but most of the staff marked for redundancy would be leaving the company. It came as Harbour report half-year results that made clear the impact of the energy profits levy, or windfall tax, which was initially imposed by the Conservatives and increased under Labour. Harbour made a profit before tax of $1.6bn (£1.2bn) but faced a tax bill of $1.8bn, resulting in a post tax loss of $174m. This was largely down to UK windfall levies plus foreign exchange transactions. The report said: 'The effective tax rate for the six months ending on June 30 2025 was 111pc, compared to 85pc for the same period in 2024.' The company said the increase was 'primarily' down to a deferred tax charge resulting from Labour's decision to extend windfall taxes to 2030. Linda Cook, Harbour's chief executive, said: '[The UK] remains a challenging environment for us... the fiscal regime means investment here just finds itself hard to compete with the opportunities we have in other countries. 'Going forward, we do expect investment to decline in the UK, given the fiscal and regulatory conditions. We will still have some high return opportunities, but overall investment is likely to decline and will be replaced by investment in Norway, Argentina and, over time, Mexico. 'The UK is one of our highest countries for unit operating costs… and it's one of our highest tax environments as well. So that [UK] production will get replaced over time with production from other countries, and that's a good thing for us overall.' Focus shifts permanently from UK Last week, Donald Trump said Britain was wasting a 'treasure chest' of oil and gas. He wrote on Truth Social: 'The taxes are so high, however, that it makes no sense. They have essentially told drillers and oil companies that, 'We don't want you.'' The US president said reopening the North Sea could deliver a 'vast fortune' for the UK and 'far lower energy costs for the people!' Harbour was a primarily UK-focused oil and gas producer but has shifted its focus as successive governments imposed ever-tougher windfall taxes and climate-related drilling restrictions. Last year the company acquired the upstream operations of Germany's Wintershall Dea, giving it production centres in Norway, Argentina, Germany and Mexico. The move tripled output to 475,000 barrels of oil a day compared to the 159,000 seen in the first half of 2024, with reserves also tripled at an estimated 1.3 billion barrels. The company still operates several oil and gas production hubs in UK waters. Investment is focused on two of them, J-Area and Greater Britannia Area, in the central North Sea. However, Ashley Kelty, an analyst at Panmure Liberum investment bank, said Harbour had permanently shifted its focus from the UK to other parts of the world. Harbour also published an 'adjusted profits' figure discounting the impacts of windfall taxes, showing underlying profits of $410m, and announced a $100m share buyback programme alongside a $455m dividend for shareholders.


Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘They're taking land off hard-working people': The victims of Labour's war on allotments
Three or four mornings a week, Victor Thomas, 77, a retired watchmaker from Storrington, Sussex, walks 20 minutes down the road and spends the day tending to his allotment. 'It keeps me fit, it keeps me active, it keeps the veg coming,' he says. 'It's what keeps me going.' The warm, clear August morning I visit is no exception, with Victor digging his patch as we speak. He enjoys the benefits not only of his homegrown rhubarb and runner beans, but of the hours spent outside, in the fresh air, and the social structure it brings to his life as a retiree. All that, however, is under threat. Last weekend, it emerged that cash-strapped councils have been given the green light by Angela Rayner, the Housing Secretary, to sell off allotments to raise funds for day-to-day spending. And Victor's allotment is one of eight sites across the country that Rayner has personally rubber-stamped for 'disposal' since last year's general election. The Storrington site has been sold to a housing association, A2Dominion, which has for years been seeking to build 78 new homes on top of what is currently a field, partitioned into 60 allotments, on the edge of an existing housing estate. A necessary decision, perhaps, given that Horsham district council said it had an increased budget deficit of £1.24m for 2025-26. But it is one that comes at great personal cost to those who have tended to the land for years, or even decades. 'To use a cliché, it's like the sword of Damocles over us,' Victor says. 'We knew sooner or later we were going to move [as a planning application was lodged in 2021]. But everyone looked to the future with enthusiasm – we would put new plants in where the old ones had died.' However, as a protracted planning battle wore on, some allotment holders left and others abandoned their plots. As councils cannot sell or dispose of allotments for development purposes without approval from the Government under the Allotments Act of 1925, the plans for Storrington required a final go-ahead from Rayner. The list of sites she has approved for sale was revealed in Parliament last month, and also includes allotments in Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Oxfordshire and Somerset. Now, the Storrington allotment is a shadow of its former self. Victor is one of only a few left on the site – it is two-thirds empty. 'There aren't many of us left here simply because of the indecision,' he says, ploughing a lonely furrow. Those who do remain have been told they will be offered a patch in a nearby field, where new allotments will be created, but they are yet to be served formal notice of their relocation. Some feel that all hard work they have put into their existing allotment will have been wasted. 'I'm not sure I want to start again, now,' says Denise Diston, who has had a patch here for the past six years. 'I've just got my pension this year, and the idea of doing hard digging again…' Victor says the proposed relocation site – about half a mile away – looks to be 'roughly the same size', but he suspects it could be made smaller before any move is completed. 'There's so many people who have left, [so] they're going to say, 'oh, do you need it that size?'' he says. 'Yes, because they wouldn't have left if the [council] hadn't made us despondent.' Victor says he ultimately has 'no problem' with the move provided all existing allotment holders are catered for at the new site. Perhaps this is because he has had plenty of time to come to terms with the decision, even if Rayner's go-ahead came as a shock. That is not the case, however, at the Churchfield Allotments in Wye, Kent – another of the sites on the Government's list. There, three allotment holders are digging and harvesting against the backdrop of the rolling Kent Downs. Gerry Thomas, who only took on an allotment last year with his partner, is dismayed to hear there may be plans to sell off or develop the site. He has heard nothing from Wye with Hinxhill parish council, which owns and manages the site, to that effect. Indeed, The Telegraph found no public record of any sale or proposals for development of the site. Wye with Hinxhill parish council and Rayner's Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government were contacted for comment, but had not responded at the time of publication. 'It's very disappointing,' says Gerry. 'What are Labour doing, taking land to grow off hard-working people?' A lifelong Labour voter himself, Gerry points out the irony of 'a Labour government going against allotments, which are supposed to be for the working classes – their raison d'être'. Allotments, of course, were introduced by philanthropic Victorians to provide healthy produce for factory workers, even if they have since grown in popularity among a more diverse range of people. About 100,000 people are currently on waiting lists for allotments, with some forced to wait decades for a plot. Figures from the National Allotment Society suggest that allotments are still vital for the health and wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of Britons, with one in eight of the UK population having no access to a garden, rising to one in five people in London. Despite Rayner's department having recently announced that it would 'extend the freedom' of councils to sell off assets, a spokesman said the specific rules governing the sale of sites such as allotments had not changed since 2016. The department spokesman added that councils should only make such sales 'where it is clearly necessary and offers value for money'. 'We know how important allotments are for communities, and that is why strict criteria is in place to protect them,' they said, noting that the eight consents granted by the Secretary of State represented a slight decrease in allotment disposals in recent years. But many have been quick to criticise Rayner's decision to sign off on the sale of eight sites since last July, including her former labour colleague and leader, Jeremy Corbyn. A keen gardener and allotmenteer, the Islington North MP described the decision as a final 'nail in the coffin' for community allotments. 'Allotments have always been under threat from developers,' Corbyn wrote in this newspaper. 'Now, that threat seems to have government backing, which makes the future of these precious spaces even more perilous.' The Conservatives also took aim at the Housing Secretary, calling the move 'a kick in the teeth to local people who don't have access to their own gardens'. The National Allotment Society, meanwhile, has offered reassurance to allotment holders, saying in a statement: 'There has been no change to the legal protections that apply to statutory allotments. These protections remain robust, and no statutory site can be sold or developed without going through a clearly defined legal process – one in which the National Allotment Society plays an active and formal role.' 'We are aware of the sites mentioned in recent reporting, and in each case, due process has been followed,' the group added. However, it continued: 'The recent coverage highlights a broader issue: many allotment sites in the UK do not enjoy statutory status. These privately owned sites are not protected by the same legal processes and, as a result, may be more vulnerable to sale or redevelopment. This is a long-standing concern, and we believe it presents an opportunity for constructive discussion on how we can extend protections to more sites.' Back in Wye, the afternoon's work is nearly done. One thing is for sure: if the future of Churchfield Allotments is at threat, the green-fingered residents will not go quietly. 'Gerry's just put up a new shed!' exclaims Hilary, who tends to a neighbouring plot. 'They simply can't sell it. They'll have a heck of a fight on their hands.'