Chris Blackshaw slammed Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural AffairsKerry McCarthy for her ‘highly irresponsible and harmful ant-meat comments’ (Gazette, October 1, ‘Vegan shadow farm minister must quit’).

Ms McCarthy has since stated that her emphasis will be on improving animal welfare, but there are other serious concerns which as a society we need to address.

The choice to become a vegetarian, vegan or to eat less meat is, of course, a personal choice, but in making this decision people need to be aware of the facts, and if they choose to continue eating meat that is their prerogative.

The global livestock industry produces more greenhouse gas emissions than all cars, planes, trains and ships combined, but a worldwide survey by Ipsos MORI, finds twice as many people think transport is the bigger contributor to global warming.

The Royal Institute of International Affairs issued a report ‘Livestock – Climate Change’s Forgotten Sector - Global Public Opinion on Meat and Dairy Consumption’, published in December 2014.

In it Rob Bailey the report’s lead author, stated that: “Preventing catastrophic warming is dependent on tackling meat and dairy consumption, but the world is doing very little. A lot is being done on deforestation and transport, but there is a huge gap in the livestock sector.

“There is a deep reluctance to engage because of the received wisdom that it is not the place of governments or civil society to intrude into people’s lives and tell them what to eat.”

I agree that governments should not tell people what to eat, but feel that people would welcome an open debate about how their choice impacts on global warming, animal welfare and health.

I wonder what ethical arguments Chris Blackshaw makes in favour of meat-eating? I imagine that as a man of the cloth he is interested in the ethics of meat eating and how they impact on climate change, world food poverty, animal welfare and health?

Bryan Burrow

Kendal