Ontario weakens recycling rules, though by less than originally proposed

TORONTO — Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s government is weakening recycling rules that are set to kick in next year, though not by quite as much as it initially proposed.

It’s part of a transition the province is making toward having producers pay for the blue box system, meant to lessen costs for municipalities and encourage the companies to use more easily recyclable materials.

Those producers’ obligations were set to increase next year but due to sharply rising recycling costs — which the government attributes to inflation, labour shortages and supply chain bottlenecks — the Environment Ministry proposed ways to ease the burden on those companies.

Over the summer, the government consulted on some changes that would have delayed some measures and outright cancelled others, such as requirements to extend collection beyond the residential system. Much of the feedback opposed weakening the rules, and the ministry has now posted the details of its final decision, which it says reflects a balanced approach.

“As we continue this transition — which will save municipalities hundreds of millions of dollars each year, while ensuring services are available across the province — we continue to work on finding ways to reduce costs and deliver blue box services efficiently to meet the needs of our communities,” a spokesperson for Environment Minister Todd McCarthy wrote in a statement.

Right now producers have to make “best efforts” to hit certain recycling rate percentages, such as 80 per cent of paper and 50 per cent of rigid plastic, and starting next year they were to be enforceable.

The government eyed delaying that enforceability date for five years, but now it will maintain the “best efforts” provision for just the next two years.

For flexible plastics, such as food wraps, pouches and bags, which producers say are particularly difficult to manage, the government had proposed to both delay and reduce the target from what was set to take effect next year. The end result is now a middle ground between the initial rule and the consultation proposal.

Producers are grateful for the leeway but see more troubles down the road when it comes to flexible plastics, said Sebastian Prins, director of government relations for the Ontario section of the Retail Council of Canada.

“I think everyone who uses flexible plastic is happy that they added in those two extra years of best efforts,” he said. “(But) we still don’t think government particularly knows up from down on this file.”

Ontario had also proposed to cut a requirement that producers would be responsible for collecting material from more multi-residential buildings and certain long-term care homes, retirement homes and schools starting next year.

That requirement is now being delayed until 2031 instead of being removed entirely but that delay is still a concern, said Karen Wirsig, senior program manager for plastics with Environmental Defence.

“Why aren’t producers working with multi-residential buildings to make sure that residents in those buildings get the same service as everybody else across the province?” she said.

“Let’s remember that the goal of the blue box changes was, in part, from a public point of view, to have one consistent regulation and regime for all residents across the province. That is now not the case for multi-residential residents — until some aspirational deadline of 2031.”

The government is forging ahead with weakening several other rules, to the dismay of environmentalists.

A proposal to allow non-recyclable materials that get incinerated to count for up to 15 per cent of producers’ recycling targets will move forward.

And the government is sticking with a plan to remove a provision for producers to expand collection in public spaces.

As well, the ministry is delaying enforceability of a target for recycling non-alcoholic beverage containers in residential blue bins, but is removing an upcoming requirement that would have also made beverage producers responsible for containers used outside the home.

The Canadian Beverage Association supports the target amendments but wants to see the province resurrect a shelved idea of implementing a deposit-return program for non-alcoholic beverage containers.

Environmental groups support that idea as well, saying it is the “gold standard” for getting containers back so they can be refilled or recycled — like the Beer Store does at the moment for alcoholic beverage containers.

Alcoholic container recycling is going through its own issues at the moment, with grocers pushing back on a requirement set to take effect Jan. 1 for all of them selling alcohol to accept empties. At the same time, scores of Beer Store locations are closing and the company is allowed under an agreement with the Ford government to close an unlimited number as of next year.

That provides an opportunity to solve two problems at once, said Wirsig.

“We don’t want two different systems anyway,” she said.

“I think there are now real threats to the alcohol system, with the closure of Beer Stores and the real foot-dragging by retailers to pick up the slack and accept our empties. So what needs to happen is that the province needs to work with the Beer Store and both alcohol and non-alcohol beverage producers to expand the existing deposit-return program for alcohol to include non-alcoholic containers.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 30, 2025.

Allison Jones, The Canadian Press