Rishi Sunak’s keynote address to the Conservative Party Conference was of course well received by his audience, although his announcement of the cancellation of the final stage of the controversial HS2 project grabbed most of the headlines.

Read our report here 👈

Another line in his speech, though, about a determination to promote growth, had the alarm bells ringing for one of our readers.

Hugh Noble of Appin writes:

"I watched the speech by Rishi Sunak at his party conference and was very impressed by the news management skill which I was observing. By dropping numerous hints in a carefully-orchestrated way for some days previously, he managed to get most of the media to focus their (and our) attention on the abandonment of HS2 (as planned) and its replacement by a complex set of alternatives. However, without knowing the detail of that complex programme, or knowing how competently it will be carried out, ordinary citizens cannot make a meaningful contribution to any discussion of the merits of that switchover.

To my mind, however, the really worrying aspect of what he said was contained in a short passage within which he emphasised his determination to promote growth (seemingly indiscriminate growth) within the British economy. I feel that I can comment on that because it is of a general nature and the relevant data are readily available to all. I conclude that a steadily-growing economy is just not compatible with progress towards net zero.

The Herald: Rishi Sunak

I suspect that the trouble is that most people do not realise the complexity of the climate change system which we are currently observing. It is not a single system with a single "non-return point". It is a very complicated system with multitude of subsystems, some of which have their own non-return points. The alarming aspect of that is that we have already passed many of these non-return points. As a consequence, although we may be able to mitigate the consequences to some extent, we will not be able to re-establish the precise conditions which pertained previously.

Sign up for the Letter of the Day newsletter.


An example: we cannot possibly put methane deposits back into permafrost or cold ocean floors now that some of these deposits have been released. So we are not facing some threat in future years. We are facing it now and we have to act now, and urgently.

Ironically, the problem which some commentators would have us push aside for the present is causally linked to that other problem about which the media are currently screaming: migration. To ignore that causal connection is to threaten mass murder of humanity. Let us not equivocate. To hold an anti-green position in these circumstances is to hold a pro-humanity extermination position. Where is the evidence that contradicts that? Note: a confident attitude and a patronising smile do not qualify as evidence."

What do you think? Write to letters@theherald.co.uk with your response!