Should the government increase environmental regulations on businesses to reduce carbon emissions?

Yes, and the government must increase pressure on other nations to do the same which will make it easier for our companies to compete with those in other countries.

As soon as China does we will

No businesses are already over regulated and as a result relocating to other countries. Most of these other countries have zero environmental regs but are performing work once located in NA. and defiantly announced the increase of pollutants in order to manufacture the increased business. Try encouraging companies to return or invest by giving incentives, reasonable regulations and at the same time discourage other countries from investing in those locations. New industry in NA will bring Jobs, power usages, business taxes, support associated supplier business, etc. Then before those jobs…  Read more are appointed to immigration be sure every established Canadian is working. Global warming is not a natural event but my research would support the primary cause is population. The world can not sustain increase in population. Ever wonder why most of the poorest countries have the greatest number of people???

It is natural minutely caused by humans but the air quality water needs protection. Get stronger on fast foods etc. showing no respect to plastics paper that hoes in land fills. Natural garden sustainability emphasized. YES.

No. global warming is a fraud.

I think this question is a little miss leading. I think a clear distinction between global warming and climate change should be made.

If carbon emissions are the result of the economy than the economy must pay the cost of those emissions. There needs to be a cost associated with carbon emissions that can be passed directly to the end consumer. This is a situation that is hampered by the common access to the environment, negating political borders. Therefore it makes a case for a worldwide governing body to implement the charge of such costs. Incentives alone will not discourage the negative results of carbon emissions until alternatives are made less costly than the ones that produce carbon emissions, worldwide. Anything else will only export carbon emissions to third world countries as is the case.

No, increasing regulations will push businesses elsewhere, incentivize carbon reduction instead while monitoring and restricting the trading of carbon credits.

There's no point increasing our regulations, when we outsource all our products and emissions too other countries.

Government is having the audacity to believe we make more of an impact then China or other more emissiondd nations

The government should be aiming to responsibly use the vast natural resources of the country in a way that benefits the people while thinking about generational conservation of the biodiversity instead of focusing solely on carbon.

The government should remain focused on the larger companies doing this, rather than taxing the already poor people even more

No Unless the entire world is addressing climate change. North America will make no difference. It is a tax grab

It depends on the worker's choice. Instead of forcing them, we let them decide. It's their business after all.

Yes and provide more incentives for clean energy production and clean up while taxing large carbon emission companies

Yes and global warming is an issue, but it is also important to remember that global warming affects our development as humans, not the earth as a whole.

There are some businesses that cannot be "environmentally friendly" I believe the government should increase environmental regulations on businesses that can be environmentally friendly.

Yes, but only on large mega corporations that includes international trades. Include private jet travel, remove tax benefits from private jets.

I feel that while it should be regulated, the economical consequence of reducing productivity could have should be considered as well.

I would say that Canada is not ready for an increase in environmental regulations and we should take care of ourselves first.

Yes, but only existing new business with a high threshold profit so smaller businesses don't get impacted

decrease regulations at the rate theyre currently going. Its illegal to sell plastic straws but the government burns jet fuel at an astronomical rate for people who preach environmental conservation.

The government should first A solution to carbon emissions, which is cheap and easy to access for the average person before beginning to tax people for carbon emissions.

ACTUALLY enforce existing regulations and provide incentives for alternative energy producton instead.

Yes, and they should be taxing corporations who are big polluters a high rate if they don’t limit their pollution contributions.

No, Instead provide tax credits or cuts in order to encourage businesses to reduce carbon emissions.

I think they should subtly increase environmental regulations starting with use of renewable energy sources and other things that can be done quickly

No, because if we lesson carbon (dioxide), plant life cannot thrive, or exist, and all life will cease to exist. The carbon levels are 0.04, and if they are 0.01 less, life will die.

Yes, and not in a way that makes currently available energy sources too expensive but in a way that makes cleaner sources of energy sustainable, accessible, fast and inexpensive.

No. Global warming is a product of there being too many people on earth. Earth can not inhabit this many people.

Global warming is natural, but our carbon foot prints are just speeding the process up. All we can do is try reducing our global carbon foot print by finding altenrate options

No, I believe global warming is both natural and caused by humans. Everyone should take part in doing what’s right to fix this but Citizens and businesses should not be forced.

Yes My only issue with carbon tax is how the funds collected are used. Revenue generated should be used to research greener forms of fuel and energy.

I believe that global warming is a natural thing but we are speeding things up so I would say we have to do a little more of natural power

It needs to be a gradual process, as reducing carbon emissions is required for the future generation, however forcing less efficent methods of producing to buisnesses is going to ruin profits and probably going to ruin quality and kill buisnesses. That would result in more issues.

No Canada's carbon emissions are so futile compared to the rest of the world its not really a problem in Canada

It depends on the country's ideological status; however for Canada solely, we don't produce nearly as much C02, so it's ok.

I feel like they somewhat should; while global warming has been proved to be a natural occurance, with the amount of emissions society (not just businesses) are putting out the nautral "pattern" is being disrupted and causing it to go faster and more intensely.

Yes, and instead of letting businesses off the hook they should nationalize industries to enforce environmental regulations and reduce carbon emissions, because businesses currently have no incentive to follow laws and regulations.

Yes, but let me be clear—put the burden for change on the people that are causing it: the multi million dollar monopoly megacorporations. Not small businesses, and not ordinary working people. Provide incentives for cleaner energy sources.

There should be a limitation on which businesses should be regulated, as not all businesses produce a lot of carbon emissions so it should be critical to ensure that the correct businesses are being regulated, and not all businesses as it could harm their revenue.

They could on big factories to reduces carbon emissions but doing it to small businesses will just hurt the economy

Yes, we should impose regulations, but we should also make sure that they don't have a negative effect. There's also market based incentives of carbon taxation or cap and trade on other GHGs, such as methane, and Sulfur Dioxide, etc that we can put on as a control.

not really familiar

Yes, and enact laws that prohibit businesses from producing unsustainable products

Yes, and fine non-compliance as a hefty percentage of annual revenue so that it becomes unprofitable to be non-compliant

There is bigger problems than just car emissions, if car emissions are a problem the government should provide free transit instead of making carbon tax. The problem is bigger than this

They should do that and speak on how the agriculture industry, specifically the meat industry is a huge contributor

No, if they do the companies will go somewhere else where there's no law for the protection of the environment. Which is mostly a poor country.

No, provide more incentives instead and slightly reduce regulations because it hurts businesses.

They slow down no how fast they are trying to stop carbon emissions.

Yes, with a focus on bigger multimillion dollar companies

Government should impose regulations only on the companies in the top 1% of carbon emissions (private airliners, mass mining operations, space travel programs)

Nationalize our economy

It depends on what the company is doing, what business they are doing

depends on the businesses

I am good with where it's at

There should be pushes for all companies to reduce carbon emissions and more alternatives for green and sustainable energy.

No regulation

Yes but only for major corporations

On small businesses absolutely not, but larger businesses yes

No we should axe the carbon tax

No, the government is over regulating business, and should end climate change taxes and incentivize innovation and engineer to deal with our carbon output instead of using climate change as an excuse to over on petrol prices which affects the cost of everything else. Prioritize innovation instead of punishing the poor.

We should get rid of carbon tax 1 and 2

Invest in better battery technology. Once a more efficient, environmentally friendly system over fossil fuels exist then make the switch. As of now we're not at that point

our planet is already destroyed and we cant really reverse that so whats the point in continuing to attempt to save it? At this point we are just living it out as long as it can.

No, we have some of the highest clean energy standards in the world and only product 1.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Go after countries like India and China who are actually causing climate change.

No the government should be concerned about more efficient energy and reward that efficiency and carbon catching systems

No, provide more incentives for alternative energy production instead and enforce existing regulations

Yes, but introduce it slowly.

Abolish the Corporations

yes and no try to get carbon catchers but doing that can harm the companies

Im Neutral

No, because it would not reduce the economic hardships of such onerous emission reduction requirements.

Shrek Script

{Man} Once upon a time there was a lovely princess.

But she had an enchantment upon her of a fearful sort which could only

be broken by love's first kiss.

She was locked away in a castle guarded by a terrible fire-breathing

dragon.

Many brave knigts had attempted to free her from this dreadful prison,

but non prevailed.

She waited in the dragon's keep in the highest room of the tallest

tower for her true love and true love's first kiss.

{Laughing}

Like that's ever gonna happen.

{Paper Rusting, Toilet Flushes}

What a load of -

Somebody once told…  Read more me the world is gonna roll me

I'm fine on what it is right now.

Yes, and not just somehing like a "carbon tax" or carbon offsetting. Push businesses to invest in products, materials, research, techniques, etc. that will actually reduce emissions from their manufacturing processes and products.

by now, we cant come back from global warming, but we can try to slow it down with more fuel efficeint vehicles and such things

Depends on the regulation. We should be open to doing the right thing through regulations, even if it costs businesses more to comply, and this includes regulations around the protection of water, air and food, and other things humanity and wildlife needs to survive. But we should also be open to incentivizing markets to do the right thing, and it being mutually beneficial for both government and business, through market-based solutions like a carbon tax, or cap and trade. This worked well with the Acid Rain Treaty, so it could work well with carbon taxes if we have the right measures in place.

Only the ones that are polluting the most

Should increase regulations placed on fortune 500 companies and large corporations and the fossil fuel industry but not small business owners.

Yes, but the Government must also do their own part but setting actual binding emission targets instead of wasting time at Green summits which achieve nothing while spouting they are doing something.

In the middle. Regulations can sometimes have negative effects that are against what we want to solve, such as the problem of climate change. But we can make it so that there are things such as market-based solutions like cap and trade, or a carbon tax which help reduce emissions and keep unnecessary red tape out of the way for businesses who want to start up and find solutions.

they should focus on corporations and businesses that hold large monopolies over Canadian markets, very little on local or lower level businesses

not my prob

Yes, and businesses who fail to reduce emissions should have to pay higher amounts of carbon taxes.

Governments should limit carbon emissions not as greatly as they are but should be encouraging land reclamation so we can sequester more helping us reach net zero quicker.

The government should change building codes to include a mandatory renewable energy source for any new construction at all sectors. Offer resources to companies for R&D on how to be more environmentally friendly funded by the carbon tax.

This should be two separate issues not one

yes if its a big company

depends on certain industries

Yes, and those unemployed, as result of the change, should have the opportunity to find new employment.

Let's deal with homeless in our province

We should be trying our absolute best as a nation to reduce our overall CO2 footprint, as we are one of the biggest emitters (per-capita/person) along with the United States. However, while regulations are necessary to protect some of our most important natural environment throughout our beautiful country, we should be partnering with markets to produce the best outcomes, whether that be through market-based solutions such as cap and trade, and funding research into EVs/renewable technology so that we can advance with some of this technology as soon as possible to save the planet. That being said, we also need to recognize that this is an emergency, and we need to reduce emissions as soon as possible, but we need to do it in a pragmatic/reasonable way.

Yes, but it depends on what they are. There should be consultation with all groups that are going to be affected before going ahead. That's why I think that market-based solutions like cpa and trade, or a carbon tax could be more effective.

Yes for large businesses, and government funding for small to medium businesses to help them progress to become greener.

Foreign Corporations and companies that actively destroy ecosystems should be the only groups that should be considered for this tax.