Michael Gove hints that disposable nappies could be banned

Michael Gove has risked sparking fury among parents by hinting that disposable nappies could be banned as part of the Government’s new eco agenda.

The Environment Secretary said ministers are looking at all areas where they can crack down on plastics and tackle waste heading straight for landfill.

It comes a day after his deputy Therese Coffey said that McDonalds should ban plastic toys in Happy Meals.

But Annie O’Leary, editor in chief of the parenting website Netmums, branded the proposal a ‘retrograde step’ and said it would leave women arm deep in washing dirty nappies.

Speaking at a Demos event at the party conference in Birmingham today, Mr Gove was asked directly if it is now time to ‘get rid of disposable, non biodegradable nappies?’

Ministers have already announced plans to ban straws, cottonbuds, plastic stirrers and have bought in a 5p plastic bag charge.

Mr Gove replied: ‘I mustn’t make too much news or commit to too much in advance of anything the Chancellor might say. 

‘But yes, the direction of travel I think is that we are going to have to identify not quite item by item, but sector by sector, those areas where we do need to take a different approach. 

‘I think that in my adult lifetime there will still be as I mentioned some form of combined waste to energy, there will still be landfill, there will be a need for landfill in some circumstances. 

‘But in the end you are right, it’s to try to reduce as much as possible the amount of waste that finds its way into any of those streams.’

But just hours after making the comments at the public event, Mr Gove’s team scrambled to insist that he is not proposing a ban.

Mr Gove’s spokesman said: ‘Michael did not say we would ban disposable nappies and we’re not going to. 

‘Of course we are looking at what we can do to encourage more sustainable alternatives but there won’t be a ban.’

But his comments already sparked a backlash, with Ms O’Leary saying that female voters will not take kindly to a male politician threatening them with a disposable nappy ban. 

She told MailOnline: ‘We know that mums talk about it a lot in the forum and I think that mums would generally say why would it have to be a ban? 

But Annie O’Leary, editor in chief of the parenting website Netmums, branded the proposal a ‘retrograde step’ and said it would lave women arm deep in washing dirty nappies (pictured, a baby in a nappy)

‘It seems like a bit of a retrograde step, particularly in terms of women’s lib and freedom for women from domestic drudgery, to ban them altogether.

‘I think educating the public on why they shouldn’t be something everyone uses all day every day, of course is fine. Most children use 4,000 nappies in a life cycle.

‘But I think banning them altogether is just ridiculous. I think it is borderline offensive.’ 

She said that the Government must let parents make their own choices about whether they want to throw a nappy away or are prepared to spend the time washing them. 

She added: ‘I don’t think women are going to look on it to kindly – that a man has stood at a party conference…..maybe we should put it to a referendum, we seem to love referendums these days.

Michael Gove furiously backtracked on the comments later and insisted that a nappy ban is not on the agenda

‘But why don’t we make it a prerequisite that you have to have changes at least 2,000 nappies before you get to have a vote on it.

‘I bet it wouldn’t come out with saying ban them.’

Environment minister Ms Coffey yesterday took another swipe at plastic family treats, telling a fringe event that the plastic toys in Happy Meals should be ditched. 

She said: ‘I desperately want McDonald to give up their happy meal toys and change them to be all about what can you do on you iPad or smart phone, rather than a piece of plastic that lasts for about five minutes and then takes five centuries to degrade.

‘So there are certain things we can get companies to do that I think would be a symbolic change, even if the amount of plastic involved is not actually that much.’