We will be back

It has been a while since we updated this blog. We have decided we wish to find a new service that is more interactive which is also less demanding with time. Formating articles and images takes far to long and it hinders responding to key events quickly.

However Fox In Parliament has gone from strength to strength and along with our main organisation of Support the Hunting Act (BAN) UK you will be hearing plenty more of us this year. Expect to see a relaunch of our Fox in Parliament blog and to be an even bigger pain to the hunting lobby and David Cameron.

In the meantime you can follow us on Twitter and Facebook, see links on the right hand side. We will add a note when this blog will close and give info on the new one. We do not have a date for that yet but we are building many teams this year in parliament and internaly for the lobby and a new blog team is firmly on the cards.

To mark our progress and politics we are hosting a high profile conference to help answer the questions needed and to set the tone for Where Next for the Hunting Ban. From here we will firmly be rasing the game against cruelty and making it clear repeal of the hunting ban is not on and will not be supported by the wider nation.

Thank you to all who have read these articles and left comments, this is not goodbye as we will be back and will be a much stronger voice on the web.

If you would like to become a member of our campaign/political animal lobby then do get in touch, just send an e-mail to back.the-hunt-ban@inbox.com We are always looking for talented individuals to help the lobby and to help at events. So if your passion is stopping animal cruelty returning and you are a member or supporter of the Labour Party then contact us today.

Support the Hunting Act (BAN) UK and Fox in Parliament is a new force in the animal world but with the twist that we are not just a campaign but a political animal lobby as well. Our goal is protecting our wildlife and in ensuring those who support the most are elected.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Gary Hills / Campaign Director.

Flash the Fox in Blizzard of Activity with Gordon Brown.

Fox in Parliament campaign spokesperson said today that voters concerned with animal welfare are ecstatic that Gordon Brown has endorsed Brian May’s SAVE-ME campaign.

The campaign which is encouraging people to use their vote o to ensure that present laws protecting animals from cruelty are kept in place. Their facebook group has grown by 8000 people a week and now totals over 31,000 supporters who are horrified that hunting could return soon after the election.

Yesterday, supporters of Fox in Parliament took Flash the Fox to support Bob Blizzard, MP (PPC) for Waveney. Bob who spoke at length in support of the Bill to BAN HUNTING introduced ‘Flash’ the Fox to the Prime Minster in Lowestoft.

With full TV entourage following the visit, Flash who was resplendent in Brian May’s Save-Me T shirt asked Gordon.. to ‘SAVE ME!’

Prime Minster, Gordon Brown replied.. ‘Cruelty has no place in a compassionate society…’ In other words, ‘Yes, I can..!. Gordon Brown expressed his concerns over this issue in depth to the constituents who had been shocked to hear of  David Cameron’s intentions if he becomes Prime Minister are to allow a free vote to repeal the hunt ban.

A local resident who had never voted before said, ‘oh my this is evil, having spoken to you and seen this, I will vote and I will vote labour’.

As the day drew to a close, at Midnight, Brian May announced on his SAVE ME website (www.save-me.org.uk), ‘EXPECT EXCITING NEWS TOMORROW MORNING’.

To the delight of his tens of thousands of supporters, this morning the legendary guitarist from rock band Queen posted this endorsement from Gordon Brown..

“I want to put on record my admiration for Brian May’s campaign to keep hunting with dogs illegal. I’m happy to add my voice to the tens of thousands of other who have already backed his campaign. I also want to put on record my total commitment, that under a Labour government this ban on cruelty will be maintained. Fox hunting should stay in the history books where it belongs” Flash the fox responds with heartfelt thanks to Gordon … echoing the hit Queen Song for the blockbuster film, Flash Gordon adds -

‘Voters out there… we only have FORTY EIGHT hours to save our wildlife..’

Flash… Gordon’s Alive!

Why I think the hunting ban was democratic

Having read Foxy02′s article - ‘Cameron fails to understand democracy‘ - I got thinking about the argument sometimes put forward by fox hunting supporters. They sometimes say that the process of passing the bill that banned hunting was undemocratic. Clearly, I disagree with this, and have two key reasons:

1. The Commons (rightly) holds power over the Lords
2. Most people are in favour of a ban.

Before I go into more detail with these points, I’ll give a quick bit of background about why it is that some people believe the process was undemocratic. There had been attempts in the past to ban fox hunting, but they all fell through, either due to lack of support from the MPs at the time, or simply running out debating time. The bill that was successful in passing into legislation was originally put before Parliament by Jack Straw following the Burns inquiry, which concluded that some fox hunting “seriously compromise the welfare of the fox”.  Straw’s original bill offered a number of different options for dealing with fox hunting – ranging from a total ban to taking no action. After much too-ing and  fro-ing and going through all the usual processes of Parliament, the Hunting Bill was eventually passed by the Commons in 2004, but the Lords tried to block it, and refused to budge on the issue.

1. The argument often put forward by hunting supporters is that the ban bypassed the House of Lords by invoking a Parliament Act. This Act, which uses the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, asserts the supremacy of the Commons by stating that the elected Chamber can override the Lords by  preventing them from blocking legislation for more than two sessions in one year. I believe that this is the right thing to do: the Commons, who are elected by and accountable to the public, voted overwhelmingly in favour of the ban, would have been prevented from passing such an important bit of legislation had the Act not been invoked. It is my opinion that the Lords, the majority of whom are appointed internally and are not accountable to the public, should not attempt to block legislation that was clearly so popular. In addition, if people hunting proponents still disagree that it was wrong to use the Parliament Act, it was only resorted to after a lengthy period of ping-pong between the Commons and Lords, with latter refusing to accept that their demands would not be given into.

2. Secondly, the majority of the public are in favour of the ban, so when the Lords tried to block the legislation, not only were they going against the majority opinion of the Commons, but also that of the general public: “Among the general public as a whole, three quarters (75 per cent) support the ban on fox hunting remaining, while 21 per cent want it repealed.” [http://bit.ly/banopinion and  http://bit.ly/banpoll] Whilst I do not agree that Parliament must do everything the public asks for, we should remember that one of the functions of our legislature is to represent the people, surely it should be the duty of Parliamentarians, including the Lords, to recognise that a huge chunk of the public support the ban, and concede to agreeing to it. It is, however, shocking that Cameron would seek to repeal the ban and allow hunting once again, despite the fact that the vast majority of people are in favour of keeping

It should also be noted that members of the governing party were not firmly bound by their leader’s stance, who apparently favoured licensing of hunts rather than a full ban. Labour MPs, most of whom preferred the option of a full ban, voted for one. [http://bit.ly/9yYfcL]

 In addition, I think it should also be noted that the actions of pro-hunt protestors were not always democratic: such as when a small group distrupted a parliamentary debate by storming into the Commons. [http://bit.ly/dbTz67]

Avoiding the questions, the Cameron way

David Cameron says little when it comes to substance on most issues. Labour have rightly shown up his lack of ability to deal with policy, even on hunting he is deceptive over his true intentions. He hides his passion for bringing back animal cruelty by hiding it behind words such as “a Free Vote”.

His favourite ploy, when challenged to explain his support for animal cruelty, is to claim hunting is traditional and a way of life. He will also imply all rural people support hunting despite knowing full well this is not true. If he was to succeed it would be horrendous for our wildlife.

Yet does Cameron care? No, for in repealing the ban he would be the first British Prime Minister to ever scrap an animal welfare law, yet Cameron is less keen to be associated with the reality. He knows its cruel. He and all hunters know that, yet he wants you to believe it’s not as bad as this campaign and others will tell you.

Below is how he responds to people opposed to his plan.  The reply is not from Cameron directly, but instead from his office. This is a standard response that goes out to all that oppose his view.  It’s more than likely that Cameron has never taken the time to read one letter that disagrees with him.

His response however is not really good enough for replying in this way. It shows the typical arrogance we have come to know from him. Where is the level of understanding as to why people are so upset with him. Where is any response to concerns about the suffering of animals that is meaningful and true. Where is his understanding that democracy has spoken and society does not want hunting with dogs back?

Truth is, that regardless of whether you have been a Tory for 30 years, have campaigned for animals or are a constituent who will now back Labour because of his view, Cameron will not be interested unless of course you support animal cruelty.

To add insult to injury his office provides a link to a Telegraph article in which Shadow DEFRA Minister Nick Herbert professes his belief that the ban must go. While doing so, of course, he forgets to tell the readers that he was the Head of Communications for the most pro bloodsport group there was; The British Field Sport Society (BFSS) which is now, of course, The Countryside Alliance…?

The article also fails to mention that Nick Herbert is, or has been, part of a Beagle Hunt Pack…? So, in short, how is a biased article from another one of Camerons bloodsport chums meant to give any balance in response?

We have added an original letter that would receive such a reply… If you compare the two letters you will see how little thought goes into Cameron’s response.

 =========================================================================

We have removed the names of the sender and receiver of this e-mail to help protect peoples identity.

From: CAMERON, David
Subject: RE: HUNTING BAN
To: “‘@@@@@@@@’” ************@yahoo.***
Date: ^^^^, ++++, 2010, +++++

Dear **********

I am writing on behalf of David Cameron to thank you for your  recent e-mail about the Hunting Act.

Hilary shows Cameron is completely out of touch with the British public

Labours new campaign to back the hunting ban is a triumph for animal welfare and democracy in one stroke. By launching this campaign which has the full backing of the Prime minister it speaks volumes to the values that Labour is set to continue if elected after the election.

By launching on Boxing Day, which has up to now been a day of propaganda from the hunting lobby. It challenges direct the view that the hunts are important and that only their view matter. All too often we have seen little balance in how the issue is reported by the media. Today was no exception with a pitiful interview of the Old Surrey and Burstow Hunt Master by the BBC that did its best to avoid having any fair balance at all.

Is the BBC really trying to say that out of the whole country and a new campaign that they could not find anyone to speak in favour of the ban?

The hunting ban not only works. It will continue to set the tone for animal welfare as opposed to animal abuse. Today we see David Cameron pitting his entire party not against Labour but the British public. For that is in effect what he is doing. By taking up the challenge to make out hunting for fun is more important than the economy, its little wonder the public are not impressed.

Hilary Benn has called it right as too has Gordon Brown, for animal cruelty is not an issue that should ever be ignored. It is important because it makes us the type of society we want to be. It’s not for nothing that the nation has a history of defending the underdog and down trodden.  For fairness goes to the core of what being British is all about. It’s nothing to do with a person’s wealth to why others disagree with hunting with dogs.

Watch the Back the Ban Video

Labours back the ban campaign has produced and excellent short video. Introduced by Labour Minister Hilary Benn MP the video has strong messages of support for the hunting ban from actors you will know. 

                                     

Patrick Stewart, Jenny Seagrove & Tony Robinson all support the ban and want you to do the same.

To help the animals and to show your disgust at hunting with dogs all you need to do is share this link around as much as you can. If you use social networking sites then put them to good use. It’s easy and takes seconds.

Tell your friends and family to watch this video and pass it on. The more who see it the more the impact to help our wildlife it generates. Our wildlife deserves so much more than David Cameron and the Countryside Alliance.

Animal cruelty is not civilised and can never be justified. David Cameron is trying to excuse that cruelty. This is your chance to fight back and say no.

Do not forget to go to http://www.backtheban.com/ and add your support and message why you are against the ban being repealed if David Cameron ever got the chance.

 

Add your reasons for Hilary for why you back the ban

Labours new campaign to support the hunting ban is now in full swing. Here is your chance to add your reasons on why you think the hunting ban must stay. This is the first of our campaigns responses to Labour’s new campaign, launched today. So do look out for more articles today and in the coming week.

Hilary Benn MP: Secretary of State for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is leading the charge against David Cameron and his friends in the hunting lobby. He has outlined reasons why Labour not only introduced the hunting ban but also why they are determined to support it.

The DEFRA Minister said:

“For David Cameron, getting the act repealed is a priority.

“He used to hunt foxes; he talked about fox-hunting in his first ever speech to Parliament; and he has said that if he becomes prime minister he will get rid of the fox-hunting ban.

“But, like the vast majority of people, I think that the barbaric act of letting dogs tear foxes to pieces shouldn’t return to our countryside.”

Hilary has set out an easy method via Labours back the ban website to show your support and have your say. All you need do is add you name and e-mail and your views on why hunting must stay banned. It’s quick and easy to do but it makes a difference.

It is open to everyone, so even if you are not a Labour supporter you can still have your say. It is very important that as many people who are opposed to hunting add their views and support for the ban.

So do not just fill in this page yourself, share this page link on social networking sites. Tell you’re friends and families that you have added your views and ask them do the same.

Our wildlife and democracy deserve so much more than David Cameron and the Countryside Alliance. This is your chance to fight back and say no to the hunters.

 

Here is the link just click on the image and below it is our comment we added as an example

www.backtheban.com

 “There is not one signal reason for hunting with dogs; it serves no purpose other than the enjoyment of a tiny few. Labour listened to the people and was right to ban hunting with dogs. The thought of the Tories bringing it back is an utter disgrace and would bring shame on the nation. Animal cruelty in the name of fun is uncivilised and shows those involved lack basic humanity”

What else can you do?

Want to know what your MP or Parliamentary Candidate thinks about hunting? Do they support the hunting ban or do they seek its repeal. You may have a Conservative MP or a candidate who has not made his views known.

Well you as the voter have a right to ask questions and this automated e-mail lets you achieve just that. All parliamentary candidates will be automatically asked the same question so from Labour, Tory and Lib Dem.

All you need to do is add your postcode and e-mail and await the response from them. It’s a great way to let those who want to represent you know what you think. Again it’s open for all to use and you do not have to be a Labour supporter to use it.

http://www.backtheban.com/contact-your-mps

We hope you will consider supporting the Labour candidate if they are anti hunting. The future of our wildlife hangs in the balance if Cameron was to get his way. The more people in Parliament who care for animals the safer they will be.

Why not pass on any comments you receive from the candidates, we have been compiling some of the responses and will place them on Fox in Parliament soon.

Same goes for any comment you add-on why you want the ban to stay.

Of course after you have submitted your comment to the back the ban website first.

We will put them together in an article just send them to :

back.the-hunt-ban@inbobox.com

We are winning this fight to stop animal cruelty returning. David Cameron can be stopped and the hunting lobby are the ones on the run not the fox.

Labour announces hard-hitting campaign to expose the Tories pro-hunt agenda.

Labour has announced a strong and hard-hitting campaign to highlight the Tories pro-hunting agenda, specifically David Cameron’s own links with the pro-hunt lobby and his own record in supporting attempts to repeal the ban.

Repeatedly the Tory leader has talked about his love of deerstalking and promised that a Tory government, if elected, would hold a free vote on whether or not to repeal the existing anti-hunt legislation.

I am in no doubt that such a move will be swiftly denounced by commentators as class war on go Labour’s part, but let’s get a little perspective here. It is extremely easy to divide the hunt issue on class lines, not to mention strategically beneficial. However, this is not about class.

This is about retaining legislation that, despite the undermining efforts of hunt-goers, outlaws a practise that is barbaric, archaic and of little benefit to ordinary people in the countryside. In my time as a resident in East Anglia, I have encountered many people who have at least supported the ban in principle but would possibly agree that there are still many individuals who insist on flouting the law with impunity.

They’re people with real concerns about animal welfare. It is the duty of us who also oppose the ban to ensure that these concerns are met and used to challenge the pro-hunt lobby.

This is a bold move by Labour, especially because of the way such a campaign will inevitably be interpreted. In these times of recession and recovery, perhaps these issues seem trivial. However, if the Tories and their friends in the pro-hunt lobby will insist on making the legislation an issue, then Labour and animal welfare organisations have a duty to challenge and oppose them, for the benefit of animal welfare and countryside democracy.

Hunting Ban Not A Class Issue

If a person commits assault, it is assumed that they will be punished by the law accordingly. If a person steels from a shop it is expected that, that person repays or pays a heavier price for that action.

If somebody commits murder then logic dictates that they are denied their freedom. Now these are all different forms of crime yet that all have something in common.

The law exists because society deems them to be right and just. Why then do hunters feel they have a right to be the only group of people in the land to ignore society’s law? A criminal is deemed to be a person who acts against society or the individual, not for the majority good but for their own personal gain. This can be through profit or motive.

Hunters however seem to struggle with following a law that is laid out so clearly. They assume the law does not apply to them? They assume because they disagree with the law that it means they do not have to respect societies will. So no matter why the hunting ban was introduced they will look for any excuse to ignore it.

One of their favourite excuses for seeking animal cruelty is to hide their actions behind class. You will likely hear yet again that Labour only introduced the law because they hate people with money having fun.  They seem to think that anyone who opposes bloodsport must deep down dislike people with money.   

It’s an easy cop-out to blame the issue on class instead of facing reality. Just like it is to make out the Labour Party is more concerned with a person’s wealth and not animal welfare. Being against hunting has nothing to do with a person’s money, implied or otherwise. People oppose hunting because it is nothing but animal cruelty. Unfortunately for the hunting lobby if they bothered to find out. People from all classes see hunting with dogs as uncivilised and wrong.

The hunting ban came into being because of a shared disgust by decent people who expressed their concerns. Yet the hunters seem oblivious that the British public have spoken loud and clear. They fail to grasp that hunting with dogs has no place in their society. The vast bulk of Labour MPs and party members have always been opposed to hunting with dogs. It is therefore hardly surprising that they would act on the publics concerns.

We have something in the UK which seems an alien concept to the Countryside Alliance and their supporters. Something that has the Conservative Party scratching their heads and something they would rather the public were kept in the dark? It is called Democracy. Something the hunting lobby thinks it is only there for them and on their terms.

That way if they lose they can just ignore the outcome. While the Conservative Party seems to think that if they keep quiet about their intentions. Then the public will not ask awkward questions. Yet they are also very arrogant and for the life of them, can’t work out why repealing the ban is a vote looser.

For when it really comes down to it, you would struggle to pass a piece of paper between the views of the hunting lobby and the parliamentary Tory Party. So when class is used as an excuse you can be sure that Eaton boy Cameron will leap to the hunters and (class) defence. Failing as ever to understand that people’s reactions against him are not where he went to school, but his lack of life experience on anything that matters. 

Class and animal cruelty are completely irrelevant. If a person hunts who is considered poor or wealthy they inflict they same amount of animal cruelty against a living creature. A fox a hare or a stag let alone the poor mink, do not say to themselves. It’s OK I will die in a horrible way but at least the person is rich. They are the victims of a tiny set of people who lack basic humanity. Animals do not see a class distinction, only death.

The hunting world and its backers like David Cameron are good at implying hunters are the victims of society. Not through any sense of injustice or because there is any truth to his words. No, for hunters are portrayed as victims because they used their financial clout to manipulate a so-called free press. They also seek homage from the powerful to continue the myths.

Using money in this way is not about class; it is an abuse of democracy and borders on dictatorship. As soon as people look behind Cameron’s words and they soon see just how hollow his words really are. If the art of deception is to deceive then Cameron should be streaks ahead. Yet the gloss paint over Cameron is looking more and more shabbier these days.

So the next time you hear the claim that being anti hunting is just being anti wealth. Think on why you are against hunting, and ask yourself is that true? That you have based your whole opposition to hunting based on a persons wallet and not animal welfare! Well I imagine you did not have to think long.

Hunting with dogs is about animal cruelty and the attitudes of a tiny section of society who are 100% ignorant to reality. People who chose to put themselves outside of decent society.

Animal cruelty has no class only crime.

Hilary Benn to put the Tories to shame over their calls to bring back hunting

Hilary Benn Secretary of State for DEFRA has signalled Labour’s determination to support the hunting ban over David Cameron’s pledge to give parliamentary time to scraping the law. Hilary said, “The Conservatives know that the public don’t want to see the ban repealed, so they wont be talking about this in the run up to the election – which makes it all the more important that we do”

Labour has now launched a new online tool that enables members of the public to automatically send an e-mail to their MP and also Labour candidates to find out their views over hunting. CLICK HERE

This follows the successful anti hunting e-petition which was rolled out by Mr Ben recently. The new automated e-mail just requires basic details to enable a response to be sought. Fox in Parliament welcomes this move as another indication that Labour is determined to argue against animal cruelty.

Hilary Benn also remarked that “Tory candidates and MPs are going to try to keep quiet about their support for the barbaric activity of using dogs to rip apart foxes – but you can make sure that their views see the light of day” a remark we fully endorse.

Added with recent new polling by (you Gov) that shows 59% of the public would be less likely to back a candidate who seeks repeal of the ban. Then it is clear the information that you could gain will help greatly in creating awareness to the stance of your candidate’s views.

The hunting ban and its survival are too important to be left in the hands of the Conservatives. They have shown again and again that they are more concerned with repealing the ban, then focusing on issues affecting people now. It is clearer then ever that a question mark hangs over David Cameron’s leadership in his obsession with pandering to the hunting lobby.

So as Mr Ben is suggesting the question to ask yourself is do Tory candidates back the ban or not?

Mr Benn went on to conclude “Britain is a modern county. The spectacle of using dogs to rip a fox to shreds has no place here”

Fox in Parliament is keen to help further. So if you receive a response from your Tory candidate which indicates they are supporting repeal then please send it to us. We will add it to these pages so more people will become aware of their views.

Send it via e-mail to back.the-hunt-ban@inbox.com or a copy to our postal address shown below.The silent majority in the UK abhor hunting with dogs, by using this tool you can help speak out against those who seek to kill for fun.

Support the Hunting Act(Ban)UK  PO Box 427, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG1 9FD

———————————————————————————————-

Polling data, You Gov 6-8^th July 2009 2146 peoples sampled. Commissioned for the League Against Cruel Sports

In response to question

Q: “Please imagine you had chosen a candidate to vote for at the next general election. Now imagine that candidate intended to repeal the Hunting Act and bring back legal hunting of wild animals with dogs. Would that make you..?”

Much more likely to vote for that candidate    7%

A little more likely to vote for that candidate  5%

It would make no difference                                  26%

A little less likely to vote for that candidate   12%

Much less likely to vote for that candidate    47%

Conclusion: 59% state they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who backed repeal