Employment Standards

I always  read the business news as doing so gives me a different perspective on  the environment and on climate change.   Today I found a viewpoint poverty and social jsutice activists will be interested in. The June 2010  issue of BC Business contains an article questioning the wisdom of eviserating  the Employment Standards Act in 2002 and of reducing civil service numbers at the same time - from a business perspective.     A roofing contractor explains on page 52 that he pays overtime as required by BC law - but that he strongly suspects his competition doesn't -and uses the cost savings to undercut his bids.  A dry walliing contractor (page 58) states " I don't like more government regulation. ...But realistically, the workers don't have anywhere else to go, and there's no way for people who are trying to operate aove the line to counter that kind of operation. Does that mean the government has to step in? Nobody else is going to do it."

Therefore,  social justice and labour activists can argue that enforcing employment regulations is good for business - and that some business people with the government would do so.  Extrapolating to environmental issues, I bet that some business people wish that governments would strengthen and enforce environmental regulations.  I told you it pays to read business news!

Ethical Investing

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/more-carrot-than-stick/article1496341/

Shareholders of Suncor Energy Inc. will soon know more about the costs of carbon in the company’s business. ... Enbridge Inc. will provide additional disclosure about its Northern Gateway oil-pipeline project. These Calgary companies didn’t reach these decisions independently, however. In each case, the commitment to expanded disclosure about environmental issues came after talks with executives at Ethical Funds Co., an institutional investor with social responsibility as part of its core mission.  The efforts of Ethical Funds illustrate a growing place for environmental concerns in the corporate governance movement.....Now activist institutional investors are asking to bring carbon costs and water quality to the annual shareholder ballot.

Businesses that ignore climate change ignore both opportunities and risks.  Firstly, they ignore outright threats  to their business - such as the risk that they won't have available water when they need it. ( Just ask the Merritt rancher that was isntructed to turn off his irrigation pumps last fall because the kokanee were spawning.)  Secondly, they ignore the opportunity to positon themselves as environmental leaders and attract more customers or investors by doing so.

Someone Else Thinks Canada Is A Laggard

Canada was a global leader in environmental issues - the main broker, for example, of an international ban on ozone-depleting chemicals - up until the 1990s. In recent years, however, the country has fallen from the front ranks to become one of the world's most conspicuous laggards in greenhouse gas reduction and a virtual nonentity in the clean-tech boom.  This isn't just bad news for the planet; it's bad business for Canada.

In what pinko environmental rag did I find this obviously biased quote?  Glad you asked - the quote is from an article called Now, More Than Ever.  It was published in the December 2009 issue of that commie magazine  Report on Business.  Page 62, to be exact.
The article also states:

a whole new industrial economy....has emerged primarily in those places where climate change has been acknowledged not just as a fundamental fact of life and the defining crisis of the 21st century but also as an opportunity. ...the nations and compamies leading this second wave will continue with installations and innovations ....because building this new generation of infrastructure is a smart business move, based upon sound economics.

And Canada is pinning its 21st century hopes to the tar sands........this is gonna work out well - I can tell.