Public procurement for everyday essentials such as bin bags typically follows a two- to four-year tendering cycle, often with options to extend. In principle, this cycle should allow organisations to benefit from technological advances, efficiency gains, and evolving sustainability priorities. Yet in practice, many tenders are recycled almost verbatim from previous iterations. This “cut and paste” approach reflects inertia, where specifications remain static rather than adaptive. As a result, opportunities to embrace innovation are routinely missed.

When it comes to polythene products like refuse sacks, performance is the defining metric. A bag that fails in service not only undermines operational efficiency but also creates safety, hygiene, and reputational risks. Yet, procurement often focuses excessively on paperwork, testing bureaucracy, or lowest cost, rather than establishing clear, modern, and relevant performance criteria. This imbalance can create inefficiencies across the supply chain and ultimately undermine value for money.

One of the more striking inefficiencies lies in the insistence on using a small set of designated laboratories for product testing. Costs in some cases exceed £50,000 for testing 20 products in a single tender. For many manufacturers, particularly smaller or more innovative ones, this is an unnecessary financial barrier that deters participation. Instead of levelling the playing field, the current system often advantages only the largest players who can absorb these costs.

There are credible alternatives. The Cleaning and Hygiene Suppliers Association (CHSA), while not a laboratory itself, oversees industry standards and testing protocols. Its comprehensive testing capabilities for refuse sacks offer a more practical and cost-effective solution. Industry estimates suggest CHSA-compliant testing could be delivered at a quarter of the cost of established providers such as Smithers. By recognising CHSA-approved testing, tenders could enable broader participation, foster genuine competition, and focus on meaningful performance outcomes.

Beyond the CHSA, smaller UK laboratories are equally capable of conducting relevant performance tests at a fraction of current costs. Many of these facilities already work with packaging, materials, and consumer goods sectors. By broadening the pool of approved testers, procurement could ensure greater flexibility, responsiveness, and innovation in testing, while reducing costs for suppliers.

A deeper issue lies in the testing procedures themselves. In recent years, much of the testing has been conducted by Smithers using long-standing methods that may be 20–30 years old. While the packaging industry has evolved dramatically, particularly in film technology, extrusion methods, and sustainability priorities, the test procedures appear stuck in the past. This mismatch raises concerns about whether current testing truly reflects real-world performance.

In contrast, the CHSA has introduced its own streamlined and practical system, centred on the Drop Test. Simple yet effective, this test simulates real-world use: if a bin bag cannot survive a controlled drop without failing, it exposes material weaknesses that no laboratory theory can disguise. The Drop Test offers a credible, transparent, and affordable alternative to a suite of outdated tests. It is also far easier for manufacturers and distributors to understand and replicate independently.

Implementation of the Drop Test does not require expensive infrastructure. A range of laboratories across the UK could be engaged to carry it out at nominal cost to manufacturers. This would open the door to more diverse participation in tenders and ensure performance requirements are measured against practical, standardised, and modern benchmarks. In short, it would move procurement towards fairness, accessibility, and common sense.

The discussion about bin bag testing is symptomatic of wider challenges in public procurement. Overly rigid procedures, reliance on outdated standards, and disproportionate costs can stifle innovation and waste public money. By modernising test requirements, embracing credible alternatives like the CHSA, and reducing unnecessary barriers to entry, procurement could deliver better value, improve quality, and encourage innovation, without compromising on accountability or transparency.

The need for reform is clear. Bin bag testing may seem mundane, but it exemplifies how outdated systems can burden suppliers and fail to capture what truly matters: performance, reliability, and sustainability. By embracing modern, cost-effective methods such as the Drop Test, procurement can become a driver of innovation rather than a barrier to it. The opportunity is there to create a fairer, more efficient system, one that delivers not just cheaper bin bags, but smarter, more sustainable outcomes for all.