I am going to give you another example. As my party's environment and climate change critic, I meet with dozens of groups every week or every month, including people from the manufacturing sector, who want to improve their environmental footprint. Recently, I met with people from the packaging industry who told me that in order to achieve the targets set by the government, packaging would have to be bigger and thicker. That means that in order to achieve the target set by scientists, more will have to be produced. In other words, the gain in efficiency that we think will be made by achieving the target is wiped out because something bigger has to be produced.
Do you think it is a good idea to continue to invest in a company that has realized that being required to follow the rules made by the government will result in it having a bigger environmental footprint, since production will call for having a thicker product, a product that is more complicated to produce and thus pollutes more? On the other hand, if it made a thinner product that still met the targets, its environmental footprint would unfortunately be considered to be too high.
What is your view on this? Do you see the situation as being positive, average or negative?