South Australia puts pause to plastic fruit sticker ban over fears of extra cost to farmers
South Australia has delayed the rollout of a nation-leading ban on plastic fruit stickers over fears the cost will be too much for farmers.
The state was set to become the first jurisdiction in the country to make the environmentally-friendly move in September, with NSW looking at a similar ban.
But the South Australian State Government has paused their rollout and now says both states will work together to save money, following concerns fruit and vegetable producers were doing it tough and the cost of new stickers would make it more difficult for them to continue to provide to SA markets.
'NSW already had a commitment that they would get rid of these plastic fruit stickers and move to compostable by 2030 — our discussion will be how much sooner than that can we go,' SA Environment Minister Susan Close said.
'We will be able to get rid of these (stickers) which, admittedly, everybody hates … but I didn't want to cause disruption in supermarkets for people wanting to buy products and I didn't want to cause too much harm to our local producers either.'
The alternative to plastic fruit stickers are either compostable labels, uncoated paper stickers or laser etchings.
SA taking the lead to cut out plastic stickers meant farmers would be squeezed; compostable stickers are about twice the price, and any fruit sold in the state would need to adhere, regardless if it was grown interstate.
But the eco-friendly September 1 deadline will still bring anti-plastic changes.
From September in SA, plastic fish-shaped soy sauce bottles are banned, as are plastic cutlery and straws which come attached to food and drinks, such as straws on juice boxes.
South Australia was the first state to ban light weight plastic shopping bags, which came into effect in 2009; Victoria and then NSW were the last to follow suit, more than a decade later.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
37 minutes ago
- News.com.au
‘Financial disadvantage': Super boost to close gender gap
Major superannuation changes are set to roll out across the country starting from July 1, set to help millions of women bridge the gender pay gap. Starting next Tuesday parents taking government-funded paid parental leave will also receive a superannuation payment. This additional payment is estimated to help the near 200,000 Australian mothers each year and narrow the gender superannuation gap by around 30 per cent. According to the ASFA a woman taking 24 weeks leave the superannuation contributions will lead to $7,200 more at the time of retirement. When the regime is extended to 26 weeks, the boost to the super balance increases to around $7,800. ASFA chief executive Mary Delahunty said this is a major win for Australian women who take time out of the paid workforce to have and raise children, and helps reduce the superannuation gender gap. 'While compulsory superannuation has been delivering on its purpose of providing a dignified retirement for most Australians, it's long been known that women are often financially disadvantaged in retirement due to time taken out of work to have and raise a family. she said. 'The introduction of superannuation payments on government paid parental leave from 1 July on will go a long way to closing the gender superannuation gap.' Australian treasurer Jim Chalmers said paying super on paid parental leave from this Tuesday is part of our efforts to ensure parents earn more, keep more of what they earn and retire with more as well. 'A sornger paid parental leave system is good for families and good for the economy as well,' he told NewsWire. 'This important change means a more dignified and secure retirement for more Australian parents and especially women.' A second change which will see nearly 14 million workers will see their superannuation guarantee increase from 11.5 to 12 per cent starting from July 1. While the changes seem small, the treasury uses an example of a 27 year old woman who has taken up a graduate position as a professional lawyer. 'During her career, she takes an extended six-year career break for the birth and care of her two children,' treasury estimates. 'Her balance will be $22,000 higher at retirement as a result of the permanent 0.5 percentage point increase in the SG rate from 11.5 to 12 per cent.' Mr Chalmers says these reforms will make a meaningful difference for millions of Australians, helping them work towards a well-deserved and dignified retirement. 'Since we've come to government, we've increased the superannuation guarantee four times, and this means an extra $98,000 at retirement for a 30 year old earning the average full-time income,' Mr Chalmers said. While the Albanese government has implemented an increase of the Superannuation guarantee from 10 to 12 per cent. It was the then Morrison government who started the changes, which saw superannuation lift from 9.5 per cent to 12, at a 0.5 per cent increment a year. The treasury department says the changes to Tuesday's superannuation guarantee will see 14 million employees have their retirement lifted. The ASFA said this increase means a median 30-year old worker making $75,000 a year will add about $20,000 to their superannuation balance by the time they retire. This $20,000 increase will mean the median 30-year old will retire with $610,000 in superannuation, above the $53,383 a year or $595,000 they would need for a comfortable retirement. ASFA says a couple requires $73,875 a year or $690,000 combined in total to live comfortably in retirement using their super plus age pension top-ups. The major caveat to these figures for singles and couples is owning your own home by retirement. The National Minimum Wage and award wages will increase by 3.5 per cent from 1 July 2025, adding $0.85 per hour to $24.95 for full time staff. Treasury estimates this change will add $75,114 over the average working life of an employee.
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Federal Group wants 'independent assessment and oversight' of Macquarie Point stadium
Daniel Hanna I think we always thought this would be the final process. Obviously, we had a debate not that long ago about referring the stadium proposal to the Project of State Significance and the Planning Commission. So we put in submissions in good faith. And yeah, I certainly believe probably the process should continue. I think we need some independent assessment and oversight of this proposal. Obviously, we've got quite a number of concerns about what is proposed for the stadium at Macquarie Point. I want the opportunity to hear them and think they should be independently assessed. David Reilly So to be clear, you feel like this overriding legislation that's been proposed or that's been supported, that's already been tabled and supported by both Labor and Liberal, we're expecting after the election, you feel that that is the wrong approach, Daniel Hanna? Daniel Hanna Yes, absolutely we do. I've had a good look through that draft legislation, which was previously tabled. And there obviously was a consultation process. We put in a submission to that, but we had a lot of concerns. I mean, effectively that draft legislation, if anyone can have a look at it, I'd encourage them to do so. Really what that took away was all of the, for example, the appeal rights for any third party. It would override any piece of legislation, anything in the planning scheme, and also would give the Minister of the Day absolute discretion to make amendments at any time. So really there's, we thought all of the usual protections that neighbours and other parties have would be overridden. And it's, I don't think a good piece of legislation at all. David Reilly So opening submissions today, you're not due to give evidence, I think for a week or so, is that right? But what's the gist of what you'll be telling the commission? Daniel Hanna Yeah, look, we're appearing next week and we'll be making our submissions. Obviously we put in a comprehensive submission to the TPC and we'll be making submissions along those lines. I mean, we've got a number of concerns and certainly some of the more general ones are around this. We believe this stadium is just, what's proposed is in the wrong location. It's in a heritage zone. We, as a private sector operator and investor, have developed in good faith, complying with the existing Sullivan's Cove planning scheme, which represents a lot of those heritage values. And we just don't think a 55 metre tall stadium of the bulk and height that's proposed is appropriate right to the edge of Evans Street. And it will forever change what is a beautiful maritime heritage zone that's valued by Tasmanians and visitors. David Reilly Well, also, of course, valued by your company, it does push up pretty closely against some of your own accommodation assets. Exactly what's in that area that Federal Group currently owns and operates? Daniel Hanna So we own and operate the Henry Jones Art Hotel and the facilities that surround the Henry Jones. We've also got the Mac One Hotel, both on the waterfront. Clearly the Henry Jones is probably the most impacted. If you look at that iconic vista, I guess, from the docks from Mures over towards Hunter Street and the Henry Jones, it really is one of the iconic images in Tasmania. Unfortunately, with the stadium that's proposed, we'll have a massive structure looming right over the top of Henry Jones, right to the edge of Evans Street. We've also got some other very direct concerns around the stadium during construction and operation in that location. And that goes to things like getting access, for example. We believe Evans Street will be closed a significant proportion of the time during construction and then operation. And that's how our guests, our staff and our suppliers can all access our hotels. We're very concerned about access. We're also concerned about other things, yeah, noise, lights and shadowing, and parking as well, to be frank. David Reilly We've had a couple of people asking about this Mac 2.0, the Stadium 2.0 proposal, backed by Dean Coleman and of course, former Labor Premier, Paul Lennon. One text are asking, is it true that Federal Group is behind Stadium 2.0? Now it's sort of gone off the boil a little bit, this project, but is that still your preference, that site? Daniel Hanna Yeah, look, that would still be our preference. I think it deals with a lot of the heritage issues that we've got concerns about. So I would certainly encourage whenever we run over this election and we have a new government in place to consider that proposal. But let me first of all, address the concern raised in that text. I can absolutely tell you that Federal is definitely not behind 2.0. David Reilly So not linked to 2.0 and Paul Lennon? Daniel Hanna No, we have nothing to do with that project. Obviously the proponents of that project have presented to us in the past as a company, many months ago. And we thought that that was a very good project, worthy of consideration, would address a lot of our concerns and is, I think, still worthy of consideration. We think it's a much better location and I think delivers a better bang for the buck.
Courier-Mail
an hour ago
- Courier-Mail
South Australia puts pause on plastic fruit sticker ban after concerns over cost concerns
Don't miss out on the headlines from Environment. Followed categories will be added to My News. South Australia has delayed the rollout of a nation-leading ban on plastic fruit stickers over fears the cost will be too much for farmers. The state was set to become the first jurisdiction in the country to make the environmentally-friendly move in September, with NSW looking at a similar ban. But the South Australian State Government has paused their rollout and now says both states will work together to save money, following concerns fruit and vegetable producers were doing it tough and the cost of new stickers would make it more difficult for them to continue to provide to SA markets. Any fruit being imported into South Australia will need an eco-friendly sticker when the ban eventually comes into force. 'NSW already had a commitment that they would get rid of these plastic fruit stickers and move to compostable by 2030 — our discussion will be how much sooner than that can we go,' SA Environment Minister Susan Close said. 'We will be able to get rid of these (stickers) which, admittedly, everybody hates … but I didn't want to cause disruption in supermarkets for people wanting to buy products and I didn't want to cause too much harm to our local producers either.' Laser etching is one way to display varietal and barcode information in an environmentally friendly way. Picture: NewsWire The alternative to plastic fruit stickers are either compostable labels, uncoated paper stickers or laser etchings. SA taking the lead to cut out plastic stickers meant farmers would be squeezed; compostable stickers are about twice the price, and any fruit sold in the state would need to adhere, regardless if it was grown interstate. But the eco-friendly September 1 deadline will still bring anti-plastic changes. From September in SA, plastic fish-shaped soy sauce bottles are banned, as are plastic cutlery and straws which come attached to food and drinks, such as straws on juice boxes. South Australia was the first state to ban light weight plastic shopping bags, which came into effect in 2009; Victoria and then NSW were the last to follow suit, more than a decade later. Originally published as South Australia puts pause to plastic fruit sticker ban over fears of extra cost to farmers
