Blue Rinse Ladies close to outfoxing ‘coward’ Cameron on Hunting Act vote
KEEPING shadowy grandees in their grey suits and the twinset-and-blue-rinse brigade onside in the shires is always a priority for any Tory leader.
By: Stuart Winter
Published: Sun, March 9, 2014
Opponents of hunting fear Mr Cameron is backing an election loser Opponents of hunting fear Mr Cameron is backing an election loser [GETTY
As David Cameron reaches the defining moments of his four-year Downing Street tenure, however, come warnings that he is in danger of committing his biggest political mistake by angering a small but increasingly influential Conservative pressure group of a rather different kind.
With international tensions simmering in the Ukraine, the economy on a knife-edge and the hoary questions of Scottish independence and a future EU referendum filling his in-tray, one would think the Prime Minister’s days are pretty well stretched.
In just 15 seconds last Wednesday, however, he opened a new political front which, according to some of his most loyal supporters, is likely to come back and savage him like a pack of baying hounds.
By declaring to the Commons that MPs will have a chance of voting on a solitary section of the Hunting Act, Mr Cameron has ignited what will arguably become one of the most bitterly contested political debates of the year, if not this Parliament.
To some, Mr Cameron’s decision to let MPs have a final say on a proposal to allow sheep farmers to increase the number of dogs they use to flush foxes threatening their flocks is nothing more than a technical issue.
For Conservatives Against Fox Hunting, and a powerful confederation of welfare organisations, the decision is an attempt to repeal one of the most controversial laws on the statute book, a tally-ho short of a full return to the pageantry of riding with hounds in pursuit of wild mammals.
Nine years ago, the Hunting Act outlawed the practice of using more than two dogs to hunt hares, stags and foxes after a long political wrangle that saw pro-hunting extremists storming Westminster.
Since then, prosecutions against hunts have been steeped in controversy. Even the Prime Minister’s hunt, the Heythrop, found itself in court for breaking a law critics describe as unworkable and supporters say is a necessity in a civilised society that respects animal welfare
By declaring to the Commons that MPs will have a chance of voting on a solitary section of the Hunting Act, Mr Cameron has ignited what will arguably become one of the most bitterly contested political debates of the year
As part of the Coalition Agreement, MPs were promised a free vote on a repeal of the Act. Opponents of the latest parliamentary move believe there will be nothing free about any vote in coming weeks because it will be Government business.
Whether backbenchers will be under orders from the party whips to vote on the issue is unclear but for those Tories who eschew what they describe as the gory pageantry of animals being ripped to pieces in the name of sport, there are fears the Prime Minister is creating an election loser.
The Blue Foxes, as the anti-hunt Tories call themselves, point to a recent Ipsos Mori poll which shows that 80 per cent of the country believes the fox hunting ban should not be repealed. In an open letter signed by seven MPs who support Conservatives Against Fox Hunting, the case for keeping the Hunting Act untouched is clear.
The letter, signed by MPs Stuart Andrew, Caroline Dinenage, Sir Roger Gale, Simon Kirby, Dominic Raab, Lee Scott and Mike Weatherley, says: “Calls for a relaxation or repeal of the hunting ban perpetuate an outmoded image. Times change and politics change. It is time to say that hunting with dogs has had its day and it is time to move on.”
Blue Foxes founder Lorraine Platt said: “We see this as a back-door relaxation of the hunting ban. It is so toxic. It’s like they are on a crash course to destroy the perception and image of the Tory party.
“The party is already criticised for having little empathy with ordinary people and is keen to show it is for working people but this has no compassion. It is not about helping farmers, it’s about helping their mates, the hunting lobby. The party is very keen to engage and appeal to more women supporters and voters but the issue is alienating those women.”
Robbie Marsland, UK Director of IFAW, said: “It seems the Government is using underhand methods designed to make the Hunting Act unenforceable rather than calling for an honest vote on repeal they know they would lose. The impact of the amendment being considered would be, in effect, a return to the cruel hunting of wild mammals with packs of hounds. We simply cannot allow foxes and stags to be chased and ripped apart by dogs for human enjoyment.
“It is vital that people speak out and ensure our wildlife is protected from unacceptable cruelty. We urge everyone to contact their MP and ensure they vote against the proposed amendment.”
Labour MP Chris Williamson, a trustee of the League Against Cruel Sports, received confirmation from the Prime Minister that the Commons will get to vote on a change to the Hunting Act during last week’s questions. “It is time for Cameron to stop being a coward,” he said.
“If he wants a return to hunting, he needs to be open and honest about this and have a democratic vote on repealing the Hunting Act.”
Joe Duckworth, the League’s chief executive, said: “An amendment to the Hunting Act is nothing but repeal by the back door and would be a devious attempt to bring back hunting to please a small minority.”
For the Hunting Act’s biggest critic, the Countryside Alliance, a full-scale repeal would be far more welcome. Tim Bonner, its director of campaigns, said: “While the Countryside Alliance supports the amendment put forward by Welsh farmers, we believe the Hunting Act is a bad law that should be thrown out in its entirety.
“This is a very small amendment to the Hunting Act, which would allow upland farmers to more effectively protect their stock and as we come into the lambing season it is a very important issue for them.
“The amendment was requested by the Federation of Welsh Farmers to allow them to vary the number of hounds they use when flushing foxes to guns for protection of their animals. It is backed by sound research.
“For this tiny group of MPs who call themselves the Blue Foxes to suggest that this would lead to a weakening of the Hunting Act, or repeal by the back door, is completely disingenuous.”
Robbie Marsland, UK Director of IFAW, said: “It seems the Government is using underhand methods designed to make the Hunting Act unenforceable rather than calling for an honest vote on repeal they know they would lose. The impact of the amendment being considered would be, in effect, a return to the cruel hunting of wild mammals with packs of hounds. We simply cannot allow foxes and stags to be chased and ripped apart by dogs for human enjoyment.
“It is vital that people speak out and ensure our wildlife is protected from unacceptable cruelty. We urge everyone to contact their MP and ensure they vote against the proposed amendment.”
