Five leading supermarkets started charging for the polythene bags they issue from August 1, 2008. The bags are priced at Rs. 5, Rs. 3 and Rs. 2 and it is estimated that these supermarkets issue over five million bags a month. This means that they make profits between Rs. 10-25 million a month by charging for the polythene bags that they previously issued free of charge

By Rathindra Kuruwita and Lakna Paranamanna
Polythene bags which were introduced in the late 1970s became quite popular with Sri Lankans, and completely ruined the traditional shopping bag industry for a variety of reasons. Not only were they easy to carry, they were versatile because even liquids could be carried in them. The most important factor for us Sri Lankans, was that they were inexpensive.

Considering the immense environment damages caused by the usage of polythene, the Central Environment Authority (CEA) decided to ban the manufacturing, selling and using polythene with a thickness of less than 20 microns from January 1, 2007.
Supermarkets making millions

Following this decision, five of Sri Lanka’s key supermarkets stopped issuing free polythene bags at the cash counters from the first week of August this year, as a measure to minimise environmental pollution. The supermarkets charge a sum ranging between Rs. 2-5 per bag depending on the size and statistics show that the Cargills chain alone issues over 3.6 million polythene bags a month, according to senior company officials. Even though Executive Director, Cargills (Ceylon) Ltd., Sidath Kodikara, told The Nation that the usage of bags have dropped by 30 percent, but it is obvious that the supermarkets are making a quiet fortune by charging for the polythene bags they issue at a price.

As people became aware of the enormous profits these organisations were making, many started to question not only the motives of the supermarkets but also the actions of the CEA. Although the supermarkets claim that they see drop in the usage of polythene bags, others claim that it has virtually had no impact on the usage of polythene, and that the CEA appears quite content to allow the public to, “pay and pollute.”

But it is a claim that the CEA vehemently refutes. CEA Chairman Udaya Gammanpila claimed that the aim of the CEA is not the, “unjust enrichment” of the big corporations but discouraging the use of polythene.
“There are a lot of reports on the unjust enrichment of the supermarkets, and that this has only caused a negative rather than a positive impact on polythene usage,” Gammanpila said. “That is why we have asked these supermarkets to give their customers a recyclable bag and link it to a Loyalty Programme. At Cargills if the customer uses the bag 10 times the money he or she has paid to purchase the cloth bag (Rs. 80) will be refunded,” he added.

But the introduction of an expensive cloth bag has aroused the suspicion of many. The well known environmentalist and Lawyer Jagath Gunawardane points out that several other shops are giving away cloth or paper bags at their own expense, without any fuss or public show that they are, “fighting to protect the environment.”

“On the other hand, the fact that so-called ‘environmentally friendly’ companies are selling their cloth bags at a price and charging for polythene bags they issue, is a shrewd step to earn profits”, said Gunawardena.

Small, medium and large profits
Prices of large, medium and small polythene bags are: Rs. 5, Rs. 3 and Rs. 2. Gunawardena pointed out that the polythene bags are sold in these supermarkets for a higher price than in the ordinary shops. “As a matter of fact, I even know that some of these supermarkets sell the bags which are purchased at around Rs.1 for Rs.5. This clearly shows that this plan was implemented by these companies just to gain a financial advantage,” asserted Gunawardena.
He also pointed out that the supermarkets try to justify the inflated price of polythene bags by stating that it is only to encourage the customers to use alternative bags other than polythene.

He stressed the fact that if the supermarkets had a genuine intention of supporting environmental conservation projects, they could have introduced affordable alternatives, instead of the expensive cloth bags that they have introduced.

“They can always use paper bags. Using paper would cost less and will not pollute the environment in any way even if it is disposed of after use. So if their intention was genuine, they would have introduced paper bags which is a good solution for the problem,” stressed Gunawardena. However according to the CEA, they do not recommend the use paper claiming that since paper is made out of trees, and will contribute to the destruction of nature.

“Brown paper means cutting down more trees and it is very difficult to recycle brown paper,” said CEA Chairman Udaya Gammanpila. “So the real solution is to have recyclable and reusable bags made out of cloth and cane. What we really want to do is popularise cane and cloth bags that we used in the past,” he added.

But it is a point on which the CEA and Gunawardane do not see eye to eye. Paper bags can be used over and over again Gunawardane added. “They can always use recycled paper to make paper bags. Ordinary grocery stores follow this method, so I do not think that there is anything which would restrict the supermarkets from doing the same,” asserted Gunawardena.

Has the usage gone down?
Although supermarkets claim that the usage of polythene bags has gone down by 30-50% no independent research has been done on this subject. The Nation discovered this when we inquired from the CEA Chairman what the CEA has done to measure the decrease, and he admitted that we cannot accept the claims of the supermarkets until a proper research had been done.
“The supermarkets started this initiative from August 1, and despite what they say we cannot state for certain that there has been a massive reduction of polythene bag usage,” he said. “So a group called Eco-Friendly Volunteers are currently carrying out a research on the impact of supermarkets charging for the polythene bags. By the end of this month we will get the report and we can then assess the true impact of this decision,” he added.

The consumers comment
While high claims of “protecting the nature” may sound good as propaganda, it is the reaction of the general public that will ultimately determine the success of the “true objectives” of the initiative.

Many of the consumers we met at supermarkets claim that this has not stopped them from using polythene. For many, it is just a mere inconvenience, a nuisance. “I go for the super marker 2-3 times a week and I almost never take a bag with me. I always end up buying bags from the supermarket. And most of the people I know go through the same thing, I really don’t think that the use of polythene has dropped. But I know the supermarkets are making lot of money,” said Sheila de Silva whom we met at Nugegoda.

She was also very critical of the reusable bags sold at supermarkets. Not only were they too expensive but also it was unrealistic to expect someone to carry it around all the time, she added. “Supermarket stops are not always planned. Sometimes I have to stop in at a supermarket on the way back from work. It is highly unlikely that I’m going to be carrying a cloth bag around in my handbag. Inevitably, I end up paying for the polythene bags. How does this help the environment? The only difference is that I am being charged to purchase polythene,” she added.

Another shopper, Shyamane Sumanasiri claimed that the CEA should have introduced a system that does not put the entire burden on the consumer, while allowing big companies to rake in massive profits.
“There are some companies that give free re-usable bags when we purchase products,” she said. She was also critical of the reusable bags provided by the supermarkets, and the claim that they will refund the amount charged for the bag of the consumer used it more than 10 times.

“How do they know whether we have used it more than 10 times?” she asked. “Not like these bags have numbers or bar codes. At the supermarket I shop at there is nothing like that in those bags,” she said. “At the end of the day, we pay extra, the companies get rich and the pollution continues,” she added.

The CEA it would appear is content hoping that the consumer guilt would reduce the amounts of polythene used in the country. Once again, it is the consumer that gets the raw deal while blue chip supermarket chains make massive gains from what is no more than a publicity stunt about ‘going green’ in their outlets.

****

Now in court

The public at large are incensed about the charge for polythene bags, citing the injustice of the move to burden the consumer while putting no onus whatsoever on corporate giants.
According to Lawyer Jagath Gunewardane, a citizen has recently filed action in the Supreme Court about this decision to charge for polythene bags at the country’s largest supermarket chains.

****