Time to kick the plastic bag habit

In 2011, the Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Ministry introduced the “No Plastic Bag Day” campaign, where on every Saturday, plastic bags were no longer provided for free in hypermarkets, supermarkets, departmental stores, convenience shops and selected business premises all over the nation. Those who still need the plastic bags have to pay 20 sen for each piece.

The campaign, if it is still running, is now in the seventh year. While I do not see any progression in sight at the Federal Government level, some state governments, however, have, on their own initiative, drawn up a timeline to have a total ban on the use of plastic bags.

The ministry can learn a thing or two from Ikea Malaysia — reported to be the first retailer in the country to stop using plastic bags — on how it did it.

The Swedish retailer took only three years to “convert” its customers in Malaysia to either use reusable shopping bags or other means to carry their purchases.

It first introduced the “Kick the Plastic Bag Habit” campaign in June 2009, where customers were initially charged 20 sen for each plastic bag used. Beginning July 2011, it stopped offering plastic bags. Instead, it made available to its customers the blue carrier bags of different sizes. They can either buy these bags or use the free carton boxes, which are available after the check-out counters.

Now, how many of us go to Ikea to shop and had to buy blue Frakta carrier bags to put our purchases in? And, how many of us forget to bring that same bag on the next Ikea trip, resulting in having to buy another bag? I can tell you that I am one of them. I now have the Frakta bags in mini, medium and large sizes, and also the zippered cart bag. And, I still forget to bring them along on other Ikea trips.

If I don’t buy the bag, I will have to carry all the purchased items with my hands. If I have more than five items in the trolley, I would surely grab one of the Frakta bags before I reach the check-out counter. So, in a way, I was compelled to buy the bag.

It is not readily known if the ministry had done a study on the effectiveness of the 2011 campaign or if it had commissioned a third party to undertake one. A quick search on the worldwide web showed several studies done by academia. One is by a team from the Centre of Economics and Finance, Faculty of Business Management at Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) in Shah Alam, which conducted a study on the effectiveness of the campaign two years after it was launched.

Its findings, based on 560 observations carried out on three consecutive Saturdays in October 2013, showed that the campaign was 52.3 per cent effective in making consumers stop using plastic bags. The consumers used reusable grocery bags or other means to carry their purchases.

The bulk of the observations was carried out at supermarkets and hypermarkets, while the remaining were at specialised stores, mini-markets and convenience stores. It excluded wet, night or day markets and restaurants, as these outlets sell prepared food and wet grocery items, and are discouraged from using reusable grocery bags due to health safety and hygiene reasons.

From its findings, we can see that there is acceptance of the campaign. I would want to believe that if a similar study is done now, the numbers would have gone up as there could possibly be more people who would have caught on the idea of not using plastic bags.

The UiTM team recommended that awareness of the programme should be increased to heighten the level of effectiveness and participation of the public in the campaign.

“One way is to generate a culture of bringing bags when shopping and making the practice more convenient, especially to males as they are less likely to bring bags when shopping. As the behaviour of bringing bags is not likely to depend on programme information brought by in-store posters and flyers, social media can be used to inform and educate the public on the importance of a change of habit towards using less plastic bags,” it said.

I don’t think it is enough for just the retailers to put up banners and posters, and distribute flyers to their customers on the “No Plastic Bag Day” campaign. There needs to be a comprehensive public awareness campaign by the ministry across all media channels, including social media, to inform and educate the public on the importance of changing the habit.

The Malaysian Plastics Manufacturers Association has been reported as saying that the average Malaysian uses 300 plastic bags a year.

It also recommended that the government reconsider the amount charged on consumers to discourage the use of plastic bags during shopping. A 20 sen charge hardly burns anyone’s pockets. Its study showed that 47.7 per cent of consumers paid for plastic bags.

Retailers could also make the reusable bags cheaper. Ikea’s Frakta bags, for example, are priced between RM1 and RM1.90, while the zippered cart bag is priced at less than RM10.

After seven years, I personally think that the ministry is ready to take the campaign one level up. The public has been given more than enough time to be ready to live without plastic bags.

Remembering my dad's legacy against corruption

MY father was a civil servant.

He served as a Federal Government auditor and later the Johor state government in the same capacity until he retired. He then joined the Johor State Economic Development Corporation (now known as Johor Corporation). He didn’t play golf. He didn’t have a girlfriend, a mistress or a second wife. He wasn’t into branded stuff. His only weakness would probably be smoking cheap cigars after dinner at home with visiting family members.

Growing up, my brothers and I would envy our friends and cousins on the many hampers that their family received, especially during the festive season. We never got any. It was not because we weren’t offered any, but because my father refused to receive any.

We didn’t know he had put in place a no-gift policy until my mother, in his absence, accepted a hamper that was delivered to the house. He then warned us against receiving any gift under his name.

On another occasion, he turned away a delivery boy who came to deliver a hamper. My father refused to allow the boy into the compound and told him to return the hamper to the sender. We saw how the delivery boy pleaded with my father to take the hamper, saying that he would be scolded if he were to return with it. The front gate was shut on him.

That was how strict he was; so much so that he received threats on the phone and bullets in the mail for what he stood for. There were no threats to the family but there was one attempt on his life.

He was in a position of power, one that could yield him wealth, if he had succumbed to more than just the hamper offerings. He passed away in

1986 with a few ringgit in his pocket and some savings in the bank. He left us a house and a small debt that we settled on his behalf.

It was years after his death that I realised what a position of power can give you. And, this was when I was approached by a relative to introduce

her husband to a politician friend, whom I knew through work, for some timber concessions. I would have done the introduction had she not said something that put me off doing it. She promised us (the politician and I) a cut if the deal went through. When I refused, she remarked that I was my father’s daughter and her tone wasn’t at all complimentary.

I firmly believe that there is significant truth in what British historian Lord Acton wrote in his letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

In fact, Lord Acton wasn’t the first to put words on paper on this matter. William Pitt the Elder, Earl of Chatham and British prime minister from 1766 to 1778, had said something similar in a speech to the United Kingdom House of Lords in 1770: “Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it.”

Transparency International defines corruption as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It can be classified as grand, petty and political, depending on the amounts of money lost and the sector where it occurs”. It also said that “corruption corrodes the fabric of society. It undermines people’s trust in political and economic systems, institutions and leaders. It can cost people their freedom, health, money — and sometimes, their lives”.

And, the World Bank, on one of its blog postings on corruption, said an average citizen was exposed to power and corruption from the cradle tothe grave. Admittedly, babies have total control of their parents’ lives by merely batting their eyelids, making cooing sounds or screaming their

lungs out. And, how do parents pacify their out-of-control children? They either reward (or bribe) them with candies, chocolates and toys.

Some of them grow out of it as they get older (a smack or two from the parents can put them in their place) while others don’t. And having tasted

that power as a child, would it feel any different when one is holding a position in office either in the public or private sector?

Having a father who served with integrity with the civil service and a brother who is also a government servant, I am happy that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is cracking down on corrupt civil servants. The mainstream media and news portals have been reporting on the MACC raids, the arrests, the suspects under remand and those who are charged in court. All, if not most, pleaded not guilty despite having found in their possession currencies, gold and expensive items and documents pertaining to land titles and luxury houses and cars worth millions of ringgit.

MACC’s action may paint a bad picture of the civil service but I believe otherwise. MACC is weeding out the bad apples from the 1.6 million

Malaysians who are in the civil service, which is reportedly 11 per cent of the country’s labour force.

A lot of work needs to be done by MACC and the relevant authorities, but at the end of the day, God willing, we can be assured of a clean, efficient and trustworthy civil service.