Yes

Just take a look at the damage - and the cost of the damage - of recent climate-related events, such as Cyclone Gabrielle. For years there have been reports condemning the way the forestry industry operates - but insufficient regulation. The impact of Gabrielle shows why there should have been more regulation.

Our earth is important and if carbon emissions are reduced that will save lots of animal trees and people

If we do not regulate enough or make progress each year then our children could be suffering the consequences of climate change.

If the government organized a “sustainable” control where it measures emitions of the companies and value them from 1 to 5 star (like food) would help green washing.

Everyone in the world is currently being affected by climate change, from record highest temperatures, worst flooding, record fire seasons, etc.

Large businesses are the worlds largest greenhouse gas emitters (after overall countries themselves). In order to minimise emissions for each country, we must ask businesses to take notice. Governments can force businesses to take part in lowering emissions, but not only would that not sure right, it's not the government's main job to make people take responsibility. Businesses, especially large businesses, must do what they can and be responsible and considerate to other people and the future of the incoming generations.

Low income earners with always choose the cheapest product options. They have no time or energy to research alternatives. We need to be subsidising the more sustainable products and heavily tax those that are not.

Carbon dioxide is a natural gas that is required by the majority of living organisms to survive, it is essential in plant photosynthesis and in mammals for the process of respiration; carbon dioxide is only a small fraction of the earth's atmosphere, and anthropogenic global warming is based on false data, ice-core samples and tree rings indicate that the earth has had higher levels of carbon dioxide, prior to the era of man and the industrial age, and that evidence of the most abundant periods of life in the earth system correlated to higher levels of carbon dioxide.

Furthermore, if we reduce one ton of paper it can save up to 17 trees, 7000 gallons of water, and 380 gallons of oil which reduces deforestation, water usage, and oil consumption.

The yes position is based almost solely on opinion and has little or no basis in science. When someone asks a question, they are attacked and cancelled rather than a reasonable and science based discussion ensuing.

Once the environment is gone its never coming back, it's the most important resource we have in NZ and is already damaged enough

Just take a look at the damage - and the cost of the damage - of recent climate-related events, such as Cyclone Gabrielle. For years there have been reports condemning the way the forestry industry operates - but insufficient regulation. The impact of Gabrielle shows why there should have been more regulation.

Carbon Majors Report (pdf) “pinpoints how a relatively small set of fossil fuel producers may hold the key to systemic change on carbon emissions,”
Almost a third (32%) of historic emissions come from publicly listed investor-owned companies, 59% from state-owned companies, and 9% from private investment;