The Prime Minister’s keynote address to the Conservative Party Conference in Manchester last week was roundly welcomed by the party faithful, particularly his emphasis on his determination to promote growth.
That aspect, however, sounded alarm bells with one of our readers, who feared the implications it might have for the fight against climate change.
Read our report here 👈
That view is today challenged by one of our correspondents, who argues that we have not been told the truth about the viability of the net zero project.
William Loneskie of Lauder writes:
"Hugh Noble criticises the Prime Minister for his pro-growth agenda, which he claims is incompatible with net zero. Furthermore, he says that "to hold an anti-green position is a pro-human extermination position". This is climate alarmism of the worst kind.
I am pro-growth because economic growth thanks to coal power and the Industrial Revolution economic growth has revolutionised human life from being "nasty, brutish and short" to one where economic growth has dramatically increased life expectancy, conquered many diseases, allowed machines to replace back-breaking labour, and given the majority of the population a standard of living of which kings and queens could once never have dreamed.
I am opposed to net zero because the target of 1.5C is simply an arbitrary number (why not 1.78?) because it will cost trillions, because it will undermine our economy, because no-one voted for it, because it was never debated in the Commons, and because the industry which has been built around it, does not tell the truth about its viability and cost. A new video on the Spiked website by Fraser Myer, The Net Zero Con, describes all this in factual detail.
One of the most dangerous things about the net zero project is its totalitarian nature. It's green fascism in action."
What do you think? Write to letters@theherald.co.uk with your response!
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.Â
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.Â
That is invaluable.Â
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel