Shoppers are being bombarded with false and misleading claims that everyday products are helping the environment, an inquiry has been told.

Senators are examining the unscrupulous practice of greenwashing, where companies convey false impressions their products are environmentally sound.

They’ve heard consumers are being lied to and manipulated – and product manufacturers and retailers are getting away with it – because Australia lacks effective regulations.

On Friday, the inquiry heard how consumers are being tricked into buying products – sometimes at premium prices – that make environmental claims that cannot be substantiated.

Heidi Tait is the founder of the Tangaroa Blue Foundation, which works to prevent, remove and track marine debris in Australia.

She said Australians have been offered products that claim to use 100 or 50 per cent recycled ocean plastic, but chemically that’s impossible due to the degradation and contamination that occurs when plastics spend time in the sea.

Tait said three per cent or less was the maximum level achievable for functional packaging, and described so-called ocean, or ocean bound, recycled plastic as “the poster child of greenwashing”.

The consumer watchdog recently launched Federal Court proceedings against one such product – Glad’s recycled bin liners that boasted they were made from “50 per cent ocean plastic” or “50 per cent ocean bound plastic”.

The fine print on the packaging revealed the recycled plastic used to make the liners may never have been in the ocean, and could have been plucked from the land in developing countries, up to 50km from the sea.

Representatives of The Clorox Company, which makes Glad products, addressed Friday’s inquiry and said the bin liners had been withdrawn from sale in Australia and New Zealand.

That occurred in June 2023, after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission announced in April that it was taking Clorox to court over alleged breaches of Australia’s consumer laws.

Company executives said they could not comment on matters now before the court, but generally speaking it was “not uncommon” for Clorox to change marketing claims over time on the basis of consumer feedback.

They also complained that “vague regulations” and a lack of helpful definitions had created challenges for the company, and other similar firms.

“Companies really and truly want to do the right thing,” Clorox’s vice-president and head of sustainability Niki King said.

“To date, it’s been a challenge because regulation has not been there to guide us appropriately.”

Tait, from Tangaroa Blue, said it was good to see the ACCC acting after a sweep of the internet found 57 per cent of 247 businesses that were reviewed had made concerning environmental claims.

“Consumers may pay a premium for products that do not fulfil their environmental claims,” she said.

Tait said the result was shoppers being offered “false solutions” that disadvantage manufacturers with products that genuinely reduce environmental impacts.

The inquiry continues.

– AAP