A row has broken out today between local councils and leading retailers with both sides accusing the other of not doing enough to accelerate UK recycling rates.

The argument was sparked by the latest survey from the Local Government Association (LGA) into the weight and recyclability of packaging, which found that despite high-profile commitments to curb packaging levels, supermarkets have made little progress in the past six months.

The survey, which was carried out by the British Market Bureau, took a sample of 29 popular food products and found that 38 per cent of the packaging could not be recycled, down from 40 per cent last October.

Supermarkets performed better in terms of the amount of packaging produced, achieving a reduction in packaging weight of five per cent in the past six months, but chairman of the LGA Environment Board, Paul Bettison, insisted retailers were not going far enough.

"Councils and the public are making good strides and the UK has gone from a recycling rate of 10 per cent a decade ago to over 30 per cent now," he said. " But we still have a long way to go to get to the level of the Netherlands or Germany and time and again householders tell us that they do not want to buy packaging that they have to get rid of. Supermarkets say they want to help but the amount of packaging that cannot be recycled has only gone down by two percentage points in the past six months – that's not a lot."

He added that about a fifth of waste going into household bins comes from packaging, equating to one million tonnes of waste a year. "Supermarkets can apply incredible pressure to manufacturers to reduce packaging," he said. "The idea that they are the middle men, as some of them claim, just doesn't wash."

The report also claimed that Marks & Spencer, a high-profile supporter of green retail practices through its Plan A campaign, was one of the worst offenders when it came to packaging. It found that M&S tied with Lidl as having the lowest recyclability rates of the eight companies surveyed, with just 62 per cent of the packaging assessed able to be recycled.

M&S hit back at the report, questioning its methodology and implying that the primary cause of low recycling rates in the UK is the absence of sufficient recycling facilities.

"The LGA has chosen to only look at a skewed sample of 29 products out of our 5,500 lines, which are not representative," said Dr Helene Roberts, head of packaging for food at M&S. "The real issue at the moment is the inconsistency in recycling facilities across the UK."

She added that an independently audited internal survey had found that 91 per cent of the company's food packaging is recyclable and that it was aiming to ensure all food packaging can be recycled by 2012.

M&S' criticism was echoed by Stephen Robertson, director general of the British Retail Consortium (BRC), who insisted retailers were making good progress on reducing packaging levels where appropriate, but further argued that packaging can play a positive role in preventing food deteriorating or being damaged. "The environmental cost of wasted food is much greater than the packaging used to stop that waste," he said.

Bettison dismissed the criticism, insisting that the sample products used were representative of a typical shopping basket and noting that M&S had so far failed to publish the results of its own survey.

A spokeswoman for the company countered that its packaging survey had been audited by Ernst & Young and would be made public as part of the company's annual report next month.

Bettison also downplayed suggestions that inadequate recycling facilities were undermining supermarkets' efforts to limit the impact of packaging. "The supermarkets know that you can recycle card, paper, plastic bottles, tin foil, tin cans and glass almost anywhere in the country," he said. "What you cannot recycle as easily is thin plastic film – yet this is used in a lot of packaging."

The suggestion that a lot of packaging is required to limit the risk of damage to products was similarly rejected, with Bettison arguing that loose fruit and vegetables are typically cheaper than that which is packaged. "If there were really high waste rates from the loose products wouldn’t they be more expensive? " he asked.

The LGA is calling for the government to introduce legislation similar to that widely adopted across Europe which requires retailers and producers to be responsible for funding the collection of packaging. "If the cost were pushed onto the suppliers, they would have an incentive to really look at cost-effective ways of cutting packaging," said Bettison.

However, the BRC's Robertson insisted that the retail sector was already funding recycling programmes, both through retailers' own initiatives to promote recycling and the £4.5bn per year the sector pays in business rates towards local authority funding.