The reading passage claims that prohibition the plastic bag in local stores for environment is unnecessary. However, the speaker contradicts the reading with opposing views.
To begin with, while the reading passage argues that if the plastic bag is banned in local store, people would use the paper bag instead, the speaker actually points out that it would not really happen, because it has many shortcomings. So, not the paper bag but cloth bag will replace the plastic bag, as it was popular with consumer in UK.
On top of that, the speaker casts doubt on the reading that plastic bag is also recyclable as other recyclable materials. Her argument continues that it is not true that plastic bag can easily be recycled. She also asserts that many recycle companies are unwilling to accept plastic, because it is often stuck in recycle machine. Accordingly, even if people want to recycle, they can’t.
Furthermore, the speaker refutes the reading which maintains that it will be ineffective if plastic bag is only forbidden at the local store, because people anyways will bring plastic bags from other towns. She states her refutation that once people get used to the cloth bags, they will always take because it is easy to carry, and use their cloth bags wherever they go for shopping, even to other towns.