![Greenwashing makes businesses appear more environmentally friendly than they are. (Lukas Coch/AAP PHOTOS) Greenwashing makes businesses appear more environmentally friendly than they are. (Lukas Coch/AAP PHOTOS)](/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/silverstone-feed-data/22325717-5f90-4a05-84c9-583853cbb406.jpg/r0_0_800_600_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg)
Greenwashing cannot be tackled in Australian companies if the government plays a part in their misleading environmental claims, a policy expert says.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
As Australians become more concerned about the impacts of climate change and attempt to live more sustainably, greenwashing has posed challenges for regulators, ahead of a Senate inquiry holding hearings this week.
Though the consumer and financial services watchdogs are attempting to clamp down on these practices among businesses, Australia Institute climate and energy program director Polly Hemming said these efforts were being undermined by the government.
"You can't address greenwashing by the private sector when the government's own climate policies are facilitating some of that behaviour," she told a Senate inquiry on greenwashing.
"We've got a government that is still subsidising fossil fuels, yet businesses are expected to be making emissions reductions plans."
According to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, "greenwashing" describes false or misleading environmental claims that make businesses appear more environmentally beneficial than they really are.
Ms Hemming took aim at the government's Climate Active program, which offers a certification for businesses, products, events and other entities that have reached a state of "carbon neutrality."
The program also encourages them to offset their emissions by investing in new technology, changing the way they operate - or most notably - purchasing carbon offsets.
Climate Council scientists and other environmental groups have slammed carbon offsets, claiming they allow companies to continue polluting and cannot replace genuine emissions reductions.
"It's cheaper to greenwash in Australia, it's cheaper to buy carbon offsets, it's cheaper to pay a certification fee to Climate Active and buy offsets from a wind farm than it is to implement the technology," Ms Hemming said.
"Why wouldn't you take all those options instead of doing the hard work? That's not illegal.
"All this is what I mean by state-sponsored greenwashing."
Fuel company Ampol, for example, had been certified by Climate Active because of a single product, its "carbon-neutral" petrol.
She noted the program was not a failure of the current Labor government but the culmination of successive failures over time and has urged Climate Active be referred to the Auditor-General.
It was riddled with administrative failures, relied on voluntary claims and was displacing regulatory roles, she said.
Earlier in the hearing, the consumer watchdog's executive general manager of consumer and fair trading Rami Greiss said the Climate Active trademark had not yet received agency approval due to a lack of clarity around the scheme's rules.
"There's nothing to stop people from using a trademark in the meantime, while they seek (the commission's) approval," Mr Greiss said.
Australian Associated Press