Jason Galley, director and chief executive of the Metal Packaging Manufacturers Association (MPMA) and CanTech editorial board member, has issued the following response to Defra’s decision to reduce glass packaging charges in the UK:

“Nobody should be paying twice but there is a further consequence of Defra’s decision that MPMA has repeatedly raised with policy officials. Removing EPR costs from glass packaging does not make those costs disappear, instead they will simply be redistributed across other packaging materials.

“Because steel is denser and heavier, the steel food can will shoulder a disproportionate share of that additional burden. This will widen the already perverse EPR fee differential between steel food cans and competing plastic and fibre-based composite packaging formats, putting steel at an even greater disadvantage.

“The consequences extend beyond packaging competitiveness. This decision will have a damaging impact on the role the steel food can is able to play in supporting UK food security, national resilience and emergency preparedness, including the government’s own ‘Be Ready’ campaign. It’s another spectacular own goal by Defra at a time when sovereign resilience is the focal point of government intent.

“The government has also announced that it will consult with industry on accelerating the ratcheting up of RED rated fee modulation directly to 2.0 for packaging placed on the market in 2026. The MPMA and its members expect to be consulted.

“It remains to be seen how this shifts relative EPR fees for GREEN rated packaging at the container level for different materials but as Defra already knows, accelerating RAM 2.0 modulation will exaggerate an already perverse difference between a steel container and a plastic container for paint. Both are rated ‘Red’, but because the EPR base fees are already out of kilter then that disparity will become even greater. Even ahead of the Government announcement, the MPMA has already explained the catastrophic impact this will have on the sector and the knock-on effects for UK-made steel.

“These factors only serve to underline the fundamental issue with EPR, that the base fees at container level favour the use of higher amounts of plastic and other less recyclable materials and disadvantage steel. There is no sensible modulation without a revision of base fees and Defra seems intent on continuing to fight against the laws of mathematics rather than solving the problem.”

For reference: UK packaging recycling rates 

• Steel packaging: 88.5% (Source Gov.uk 2025) 

• Aluminium beverage can: 81% of beverage cans (Source: Every Can Counts/Alupro 2023) 

• Aluminium packaging 61.1%: (Source: Gov.uk 2025) 
• Glass packaging: 75.1% (Source: Gov.uk 2025) 
• Plastic packaging: 57.3% (Source: Gov.uk 2025) 
• Fibre-based composite packaging: 36% (ACE 2019)

To learn more about the impact, read the MPMA Manifesto.