The Editor
The Times

Sir,
It is difficult to know where to begin in response to Matt Ridley’s nightmare scenario of endless growth for Britain and its transformation into a densely populated city state otherwise found only in science fiction novels. Almost everywhere outside sub-Saharan Africa, population growth is moderating as numbers in more countries start to stabilise or even decline Even with the chronically under-estimated ONS assumption about future migration 70 and then 80 million and beyond are within sight; there is no end to the projected growth. What final total would satisfy Mr Ridley?
There is no evidence that population growth increases individual wealth, certainly not in a crowded population such as ours. Even if we wanted to it would be difficult to find the capital to keep building houses and infrastructure and services to match population growth of 0.7% per year, which Mr Ridley correctly attributes primarily is primarily to migration. Any overall benefits from migration are highly marginal and accrue mostly to immigrants and their employers, who have become too dependent of late on easy access to low cost labour, the oversupply of which must bear some responsibility for our dreadful productivity, and weak investment. Why prioritise such trivial and dubious advantages? Who wants this immigration and this population growth? Not the people of Britain, who will become rapidly marginalised in Mr Ridley’s Brave New World. And the idea that an untrammelled building boom would make us all richer by 20% is surely too absurd even for a migration enthusiast to contemplate.
Labelling environmental concern as ‘right wing’ is no argument and in any case wrong. What is certain is that the further intensification of agriculture needed to feed Mr Ridley’s teeming millions will put the final lid on the natural world in much of Britain, already reduced to barren monoculture by intensive agriculture, never mind is effects on climate change. His outburst can only be understood in the context of an irrational desire for population growth and high density living for its own sake, preferences not widely shared. Mr Ridley should remember that we live in a finite world.
Yours faithfully,