Ideally it should. However, an interim step would be to require the disclosure of substantiation evidence. In that way you would not be prohibiting general claims, but you'd be requiring firms to explain what they meant. Firms would be required to define what they meant when they used these words. But, yes, I agree with you. In an ideal world, nobody would use words such as “green” or “sustainable” or “responsible” because nobody knows what they mean. So, tell me that you're going to achieve an emissions reduction, but tell me when, how much money you are investing, what your target is and what you are including in this pledge in terms of scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 emissions. Right now it's the Wild West. Ideally, yes, but there should be no generic claims but rather specific standards and the law. There is room to make very small amendments to this bill to address part of this situation.
On April 9th, 2024. See this statement in context.