Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

B1049 – Supermarket Waste Bill 2016

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    Yeh I get that, but at times where they simply have sold most of the food or whatever, that's not their fault, and you're taking basically stripping the supermarket of its rights of being a business by saying that they'd always have to honour a contract of giving stuff away, over them doing something commercially beneficial to them.
    That's why I'd never ever support this Bill.
    I think you may have slightly misunderstood the bill or it may not have been worded clearly. If a supermarket or business sells all of its food, that's absolutely fine. The only produce they would need to give to charities and homeless shelters would be produce that they no longer wish to sell.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I think you may have slightly misunderstood the bill or it may not have been worded clearly. If a supermarket or business sells all of its food, that's absolutely fine. The only produce they would need to give to charities and homeless shelters would be produce that they no longer wish to sell.
    No, I understand the Bill, but I refer to what Rakas has said, he has put it better than I have. It should be for the supermarket to do entirely as they please with the food, as long as it doesn't get binned. If it's not getting binned, then the charities won't be any worse off, but they may still be getting more, without infringing on the supermarket doing what's in their best interest.

    I would much rather have incentives for stores giving food to charities, perhaps in the form of small tax cuts, or other direct incentives, if they give a certain proportion of unsold food to the charities.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's a good idea.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I don't like this. Brings less rights to business. I agree with something like mobbsy91. We could give tax cuts to stores who give unsold food to charities and make it a choice instead of forcing them.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    No, I understand the Bill, but I refer to what Rakas has said, he has put it better than I have. It should be for the supermarket to do entirely as they please with the food, as long as it doesn't get binned. If it's not getting binned, then the charities won't be any worse off, but they may still be getting more, without infringing on the supermarket doing what's in their best interest.

    I would much rather have incentives for stores giving food to charities, perhaps in the form of small tax cuts, or other direct incentives, if they give a certain proportion of unsold food to the charities.
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    I don't like this. Brings less rights to business. I agree with something like mobbsy91. We could give tax cuts to stores who give unsold food to charities and make it a choice instead of forcing them.
    I understand your points and it is a route I considered taking this bill down. I believed that the current concept would be better however as it could earn the government revenue, instead of essentially giving money to large businesses which is what could happen instead. After all, I thought one of the main Tory dreams was to achieve a budget surplus?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I understand your points and it is a route I considered taking this bill down. I believed that the current concept would be better however as it could earn the government revenue, instead of essentially giving money to large businesses which is what could happen instead. After all, I thought one of the main Tory dreams was to achieve a budget surplus?
    how does this bring the government revenue? And whilst yes we want a budget surplus we also like the free market and not forcing businesses to do certain things all the time.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I understand your points and it is a route I considered taking this bill down. I believed that the current concept would be better however as it could earn the government revenue, instead of essentially giving money to large businesses which is what could happen instead. After all, I thought one of the main Tory dreams was to achieve a budget surplus?
    No but we want to achieve a budget surplus without forcing businesses to do this as it takes away their rights. This is just not right. I would encourage giving unsold food to charities but never force.

    I would also prefer if this could be done in the form of tax breaks to encourage businesses to do it as mobbsy91 said.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbsy91)
    how does this bring the government revenue? And whilst yes we want a budget surplus we also like the free market and not forcing businesses to do certain things all the time.
    It could bring in revenue through fines if supermarkets do not conform to this law. I understand that you want as few restrctions on businesses as possible but this restriction will hardly affect them but could definitely help charities and homeless shelters.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    No but we want to achieve a budget surplus without forcing businesses to do this as it takes away their rights. This is just not right. I would encourage giving unsold food to charities but never force.

    I would also prefer if this could be done in the form of tax breaks to encourage businesses to do it as mobbsy91 said.
    This is hardly affecting their rights though. If you're concerned about small businesses, they won't be affected due to S2 C1. Surely it is better to force major supermarket chains to give their unwanted produce to charity than just bin it? If anything, more effort is needed to dispose of it through landfill.

    I see no reason why businesses should be praised for doing something which they should be doing anyway. Allowing charities to collect and then sort through their unsold produce is not particularly praise-worthy. It's just better than ]them throw all their waste away.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    This is hardly affecting their rights though. If you're concerned about small businesses, they won't be affected due to S2 C1. Surely it is better to force major supermarket chains to give their unwanted produce to charity than just bin it? If anything, more effort is needed to dispose of it through landfill.

    I see no reason why businesses should be praised for doing something which they should be doing anyway. Allowing charities to collect and then sort through their unsold produce is not particularly praise-worthy. It's just better than ]them throw all their waste away.
    I agree with you totally, but I just don't like the fact that you are forcing businesses into doing this. You should never force businesses to do anything. You can drive off a lot of businesses out of this country if you are going to introduce policies which force them to do it. Like I said, I only encourage it. It's something all businesses should be doing and but I would never agree with forcing them into doing it.

    This is what makes me agree with this bill and unless you change this then I will never agree with it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Agree with what Rakas and Mobbsy have said. As long as the food isn't binned, why force them to do something with their produce? Also, are there any figures for the proportion of food waste that come from supermarkets? The 14 million ton figure provided is general and doesn't give any indication of whether the majority is household waste or otherwise. For now, I'll probably abstain.

    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    I understand your points and it is a route I considered taking this bill down. I believed that the current concept would be better however as it could earn the government revenue, instead of essentially giving money to large businesses which is what could happen instead. After all, I thought one of the main Tory dreams was to achieve a budget surplus?
    That's not sustainable or predictable government revenue if you're reliant on people breaking the law for income. If this is an argument to support this bill it's an extremely weak one.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Financier)

    That's not sustainable or predictable government revenue if you're reliant on people breaking the law for income. If this is an argument to support this bill it's an extremely weak one.
    It's not the main argument at all. I'm just pointing out that it is better not to waste government mney when the same end result can be much more effectively achieved through a different method.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Financier)
    Agree with what Rakas and Mobbsy have said. As long as the food isn't binned, why force them to do something with their produce?
    I think you, Rakas and Mobbsy are missing the fundamental point. This helps people in poverty - potentially to a great degree. I've had a decent amount of input in the Labour sub to make sure the impact on businesses is as small as possible while still achieving that goal, but aside from tax breaks (not necessary for this policy), what do you suggest? It's not exactly like this is going to cause supermarkets to close, or them to relocate abroad.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrMackyTv)
    I agree with you totally, but I just don't like the fact that you are forcing businesses into doing this. You should never force businesses to do anything. You can drive off a lot of businesses out of this country if you are going to introduce policies which force them to do it. Like I said, I only encourage it. It's something all businesses should be doing and but I would never agree with forcing them into doing it.

    This is what makes me agree with this bill and unless you change this then I will never agree with it.
    Supermarkets can hardly leave the Country, it's not as if they can ship everyone's shopping in from France.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kay_Winters)
    Supermarkets can hardly leave the Country, it's not as if they can ship everyone's shopping in from France.
    And if they do leave, then I'm not fussed. Power to the local butchers and grocers!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This bill is in cessation.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This bill has gone to a second reading.
 
 
 
Updated: September 22, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Which party will you be voting for in the General Election 2017?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.