Global negotiations on plastic treaties do not reach a consensus – once again

What was supposed to be the last series of negotiations for a legally binding global treaty to put an end to plastic pollution failed to achieve consensus.

After the delegates spent 10 days in Geneva, Switzerland, trying to combat plastic pollution, the session was postponed, without immediate plans to resume efforts to achieve a treaty.

The World Wildlife Fund called for ambitious states to conclude a separate agreement, with the hope of later obtaining plastic producing countries.

“The consensus is dead, it is clear that it does not work,” the international coordinator of the International Pollutants Network (IPEN) told CBC News International Pollutant Coordinator.

It was the sixth time that countries have summoned themselves within the framework of the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiation Committee, which was to reach an agreement by 2024.

Representatives of 183 countries and 400 organizations arose and the issues were high.

About 7,250 plastic megatons pollute the planet, according to Lancet’s countdown on health and plasticswhich was published in Health Policy earlier this month. And plastic production is in the run by 2060.

Anthony Merante, a senior plastic activist for the Oceana Canada non -profit organization, says that the imposition of limits on plastic production was at the heart of the disagreement.

“It is regrettable that some of the largest countries in the world want to stand on the way that leads us to make more plastic and pursue the pollution crisis we have,” he told CBC News in Geneva on Friday. “But we are happy to see Canada stand on the right side of that.”

Defective process, say the participants

Consensual decision -making paralyzed the talks, Erin Simon, plastic expert and packaging at the World Wildlife Fund, told the Associated Press in December.

A consensus means that each nation must agree so that there is a legally binding treaty.

“Each country has a veto card,” said Simon. “They have no incitement to find a plan and we have repeatedly seen in these negotiations.”

During negotiations in Busan, South Korea, in December 2024, Saudi Arabia, Russia, India and other countries that produce plastics and oil and gas pushed for better waste management and recycling – not plastic production ceilings. This remained the case in Geneva.

Look | Why is it so difficult to put an end to plastic pollution:

Why is it so difficult to put an end to plastic pollution

Thousands of delegates are in Ottawa by trying to hammer a historic treaty to end plastic pollution, but the road to get there is strewn with obstacles. Susan Ormiston of CBC examines why it is so difficult to limit the problem and what it will take for the world to get along on a plan.

“Problems like production are very, very difficult to move,” said Beeler d’Ipen on Monday on Monday, halfway through negotiations. IPEN is a global network of more than 600 organizations in 131 countries that conducts research to help influence global policy.

“It is clear (many plastic producing countries) do not want a treaty. It is clear that the only thing they would tolerate would be an agreement that addresses plastic waste management, and even there, they are difficult,” said Beeler.

Beeler says that the emphasis on waste management and recycling pushes responsibility to the general public.

Big fracture on certain subjects

Production limits and means of treating chemicals used in plastic products have been removed from a draft Presented Wednesday, which was supposed to be the second day of negotiations.

When the countries met on Wednesday evening on Wednesday evening, the delegation of Colombia said that it would not accept the new project as the basis of negotiations, qualifying the unbalanced text and does not lack ambition and global obligations necessary to put an end to plastic pollution.

Canada and many other delegations agreed – notably Panama, Mexico, Chile, Ghana, Norway, the United Kingdom, the European Union and the Small States Development Islands. They are all part of the high ambition coalition, an ambitious group of countries committed to ending plastic pollution by 2040.

“Let me be clear – it is not acceptable to future generations,” said Erin Silsbe of the Environment and Climate Change Canada.

Fiji delegate, Sivendra Michael, said it would be like “cleaning the floor without extinguishing the tap”.

Nearly 100 countries wanted to limit plastic production, as well as waste cleaning and recycling. Instead, the draft of the treaty focused on the overhaul of plastic products so that they can be recycled and reused and improve waste management.

Nor has it imposed global and legal rules, asking nations to make their own commitments to end plastic pollution.

Christa Seaman, Vice-President of the plastics of the Chemistry Industry Association of Canada, is against a ceiling on plastic production and rather considers recycling, reuse and reuse as the best way to follow.

“When you have the appropriate systems for collection, sorting and recycling in place, we can actually start to have really significant impacts on recycling rates,” she said, pointing to British Columbia, which had a 45% recovery rate for plastic last year.

What it means for Canadians

Canada was part of the high ambition coalition to end plastic pollution since its inauguration in 2022.

“Plastic pollution is not experiencing borders, global rules are essential to protect ecosystems, coastal and indigenous communities, and to respond to cross -border threats,” Kennan Nembhard, environment and climate change Canada, said press release.

Canada generates 4.7 million tonnes of plastic waste per year and recycles only about 8%, according to Oceana Canada.

“If you want to effectively fight plastic pollution, you have to do so, because we have been making plastic for more than five decades now and recycling has never reached two -digit efficiency figures,” said Oceana Canada.

“We have seen plastic washing on our banks, filling out our oceans, filling the stomach with fauna like whales and sea birds and dolphins. We have seen the devastating effects of this and now we learn the effects of human health from that.”

Merant says that without treaty, there are no next clear steps for Canadians. He hopes that the government will adopt new legislation to provide advice, but says that companies must be on board for things to change.

Tori Cress of Beausoleil’s First Nation called “possibility of loss” negotiations and said that it had failed to tackle human rights.

She is part of the International Forum of Aboriginal Peoples on PlasticsA group of indigenous experts working to maintain their rights, knowledge and solutions in all processing processes, such as negotiations.

“All this work we have put to have a treaty with our full and effective participation has been erased (Wednesday) when they abandoned the new text, but we will continue to put pressure for an ambitious and legally binding treaty which approaches the full plastic life cycle,” said CBC News on Wednesday.

Cress says they are not hopeful, but will continue to do the work anyway because the health of our ecosystems is not negotiable.

Beeler d’Ipeen originally hoped that the treaty was attacked by chemicals in plastics. Sixty-five countries supported the proposal presented by Switzerland and Mexico at the start of negotiations, which examined problematic plastics and chemicals, and at the end, there were at least 89 countries on board.

It did not succeed, but he says that it would be a very easy way to regulate chemicals inside plastics, and would also help world trade, because there would be more predictability of imports of other countries.

“The UNEP report published in 2023 reported 14,000 chemicals, recognizing that about a quarter of these chemicals are dangerous, linked to prejudice to human health, cancer, prejudice to reproduction, etc.