Worst hit will be the direct mail (DM) sector. Last week, it was reeling from government plans meaning people would have to ‘opt-in’ to receive unaddressed mail. The government’s argument is that it needs to reduce waste and “prevent it in the first place”. This means changes to the Mail Prefer­ence Service (MPS), which allows people to opt-out of receiving all forms of DM.

It predictably drew a scathing response from many DM printers, all arguing that such a move would be disastrous and could even spell the end for DM. “It’s a thoughtless knee-jerk reaction – bloody politicians,” said one.

Mail preferences
The general industry view is that the current MPS system works perfectly fine and there’s no need for government interference.

“Getting the general public to buy into receiving DM in the first place would be difficult,” says 4DM sales and marketing director Robin Skinner. “It would have a devastating effect on the industry.”

Howard Hunt Group marketing director Lucy Edwards explains: “It means the end of inserts and door drops.”

That’s bad news for the industry, as those campaigns, known as acquisitive, can help DM firms build up and update databases. It also might have a negative impact on charities using the method to raise money.

“I do not see how the government can make it a workable scheme,” argues Dsi CMM group managing director Andy Young.

It’s something that Alex Walsh, head of postal affairs at the Direct Marketing Association (DMA), will bring up with ministers at a meeting next month. He is also concerned at the phrase ‘opt-in’.

“The first thing that we will argue is that an opt-in mechanism is not required,” he says. “MPS works in a similar way. Up to now, our discussions with the government have suggested that self-regulation is sufficient. It’s much more effective.”

But before everyone gets too worked up about the government’s plans, Walsh suggests it would be wiser to wait and see. At the moment, the opt-in mechanism is being ‘explored’ and the details are sketchy.

“It’s difficult to say what the impact will be as we don’t know what form the opt-in will take,” he explains. “A lot of things need to be thought through and discussed.”

It may not offer much consolation to DM, but many other countries in Europe, including Germany, already have very strict opt-in mechanisms for consumers.

But that’s not what the industry wants to hear and the widespread view is that opt-in would be bad news. If, in a worse case scenario, opt-in does go ahead, Walsh urges the government to give the DM industry time to adjust to the changes.

Excess packaging
DM isn’t the only sector that feels the waste strategy is a hindrance rather than a help. Packaging Federation chief executive Dick Searle reckons that the drive to reduce “excess packaging” is muddled and isn’t addressing the real environmental issues.

The government is planning to set ‘optimal packaging standards for a product class’. Searle argues that this should be overseen by a body that is close to the packaging industry as it would be able to better understand what the ‘best in class’ would be for a particular item.

But his main concern is that this only prolongs the kicking the packaging industry has received – not just by the national press, but now from the government.

“Excessive packaging is a small problem that is fast becoming an urban myth,” he argues. “The reality is that packaging protects, preserves and promotes. It only represents 3% of landfill.”

Attacking cars
Seale adds that packaging is often picked on by government, which should be focusing its attention on other areas. “One day’s worth of packaging equals one mile in a car. But the government doesn’t attack the car in the same way as packaging.”

He argues: “To me, the big failing of this waste strategy is the lack of joined-up thinking. The recycling facilities in this country are disgraceful and there just isn’t a culture to recycle. In other countries in Europe this is not an issue.”
Despite the waste strategy now being “cast in stone”, Searle is willing to concede that there are some areas that the Packaging Federation can support.

“We will be supporting the initiatives in terms of seeking better co-ordination with various authorities,” he says. “Also, we will back campaigns to increase recycling.”

But the general consensus is that the waste strategy isn’t good news and that central government is likely to take control of areas that are best left to self regulation. Using phrases like ‘junk mail’ and ‘excessive packaging’ play well to the galleries, but the government is set to find that the print industry will be a more demanding audience.

---

GOVERNMENT'S WASTE STRATEGY
Paper The government aims to establish with the paper industry an agreement with “challenging targets to reduce paper waste and increase paper recycling, incorporating and developing existing agreements for newspapers, magazines and direct mail”. It also wants this extended to office papers, free newspapers, catalogues and directories
Packaging Plans to reduce excess packaging by, for example, “setting optimal packaging standards for a product class”
Direct mail The government aims to develop an opt-out for unaddressed mail with the DMA to improve “delivery on their action on addressed mail, to reduce the amount of unwanted direct mail”. Also the government is to “explore the scope for an opt-in mechanism”