If a measure is bad for the economy, that's a negative point for the measure. In the case of (many) environmental measures, the good outweighs the bad. It is

If a measure is bad for the economy, that's a negative point for the measure. In the case of (many) environmental measures, the good outweighs the bad. It is bad for business, but on balance we think it's worth the cost. There are many negative aspects to C51. The business community is qualified to weigh in with authority on the negative business implications. Highlighting these costs adds to other negative aspects (like, I dunno, descending into a police state) to hopefully move more people to think the cost isn't worth it in this case. Many business people have other reasons for opposing C51, of course, but their voice as businesspeople carries more weight when talking about business. There's no contradiction between this and the environmental issue. Nor is it "more grown up" to claim that there's one and only one true reason to oppose the bill.