Posts Tagged ‘Countryside Alliance


The politics of cruelty with David Cameron

Decency took a step back today by allowing an unelected David Cameron to assume office. His party won no mandate and has no  legitimacy is saying his manifesto stands. His pledge to repeal the hunting ban was an indication of just how far removed he is from decent society. Whatever Cameron may assume he is, he will never fill the shoes of the man he replaced?

So where does this leave our wildlife, well it’s not good the balance of numbers in the commons is tight. Yet there are no guarantees that Cameron will even honour a Free Vote, despite his pledge. For if he thinks he would lose his bid for repeal on a Free Vote he will make it a government bill. There is also the option of a Private Members Bill which would amount to the same result. His defence for such underhand tricks would be to say a commitment to repeal was in the manifesto or that he is supporting one of his MPs with legitimate concerns.

It’s also more than likely he will hide the repeal among other pieces of legislation. So it will be the case that if you oppose it, you would also be saying no to some sweetener that is added. Other moves could see the timing of the bill come into play. If they time it when they know the least number of MPs opposed to repeal were present. Then again the result would be bad.

Labour is short some 49 MPs of the Tories 307. Yet now with the Lib Dems added in it gives them 364. On paper that is a majority of 106. How the Lib Dems vote will decide the outcome. 30 have indicated they would support the ban. Yet that was on the assumption it was a Free Vote. It’s the same with the Tories. 14 said they would support the ban. Yet again if not a Free Vote would they? For to have a career in the Tories today you have to be pro hunting.

Labour MPs will step up to the plate and they will lead to fight against repeal in the Commons. Of that we have no doubt. Out of all the 258 Labour MPs it is expected only two would vote for repeal. So you can be sure we will be making their names known if that is the case. There is no justification for any Labour MPs to support animal cruelty.

The League Against Cruel Sports have come up with some numbers, now we have not had time to look at them in full to see which MPs they refer to. What is clear however is this is no time for thinking Cameron could not achieve his aims?

Of the new parliament according to the League Against Cruel Sports.

  •      251 MPs support the repeal
  •      254 MPs support the ban
  •      6 would abstain
  •      35 MPs have not declared which way they would go.

This will no doubt be a massive battle and there is much lobbying needed. If the figures are correct then it really is tight. Nothing can be taken for granted. The way the public can help is to keep raising it with their MPs and in public. Let others know that this is not a what if. David Cameron placed repealing the hunting ban in his manifesto and it’s no joke.

Put pressure on Nick Clegg, what is his Party’s policy. Will he abide by the will of the people or a stick to a dodgy undemocratic deal with Cameron? It’s not good enough for Clegg not to answer or to spell out his party’s position. We as Support the Hunting Act (BAN) UK and Fox in Parliament will be challenging him to do the right thing. If not then he is as bad as David Cameron. Campaign groups will mobilise but it needs you to help spread the word and get involved. We are looking for new bloggers and people to join us.

There are many positions within the campaign that need good people to fill. We are towards the Labour Party, so if you are interested it’s expected that you would support Labour being in office. For info send an e-mail to:

We always said a man who sees nothing wrong in animals being torn apart for fun is unfit to lead the nation. That is still the case, nothing has changed. We cannot allow the hunting lobby through David Cameron to dictate policy over our wildlife.

Continue reading ‘The politics of cruelty with David Cameron’


Camerons self interest against the nation

I was compelled to write this article due to the risks to our wildlife. Both from David Cameron and his Conservative party who are determined to repeal the ban on hunting with dogs. The hunting ban remains popular and well supported it is therefore staggering that David Cameron would seek its repeal. If David  Cameron gets his way it will be a travesty of justice.  Thousands of animals will die in both a horrific and needless fashion.

Hunting with hounds is an out moded and barbaric past time of the rich and the bored. I fail to see how pleasure can be derived, in capturing an animal, taking it miles away from its set. Releasing it, knowing it will be chased by ravenous dogs (ravenous because they have deliberately not been fed for a day perhaps even two before the hunt). If the fox does make it back to its set, exhausted, terrified out of its wits and virtually unable to stand, the creature then discovers a member of the hunt has filled in the set. Therefore rendering the sanctuary of the foxes home unobtainable.

The fox is then torn apart, whilst still alive, by the starving hounds! Any new member of the hunt has the ‘honour’ of being daubed with blood from the fox’s brush. How can this be acceptable in today’s society? The UK voiced their disgust at such heinous behaviour and voted to ban hunting with hounds. Cameron can have no respect for the citizens of The UK, how could he if he is determined to repeal such an important law?  A law that people feel so passionately about?

Cameron and his co horts want to repeal the ban, for personal gain.

Even though it has been against the law to hunt animals with hounds for the last five years in The UK, Camerons hunting supporters have still been blatantly hunting with hounds and thus BREAKING the law in some parts of the country. Some in the hunting world never actually stopped hunting with hounds, flaunting the fact.

Cameron has also said that if the Conservatives get back into power then in the first week there will also be a badger cull of epic proportions. This man is ruthless and vindictive; he has no morals, no scruples, and sees animals as merely a means of entertainment. He is on record as telling voters in Plymouth that he would be willing to sanction badger culling.

Any person and political party who has such scant regard for the wishes of The United Kingdom, who runs rough shod over the unified decisions made by its peoples.

Any person and political party who has shown no respect for the animal’s and human’s, who would be at the mercy of such a party, in my and many others opinions, should NEVER be allowed to govern our wonderful, noble island, and Northern Ireland. I hope that this article will help towards ensuring the continued ban on Hunting with Hounds, that the law is never repealed, and that the Conservative Party never gets back into power.

(ED) We share your views and concerns. It is more clear than ever that Mr Cameron would be the wrong choice to be Prime Minister. Our wildlife and our nation deserve so much more than David Cameron.

Written by  Lisa Huskisson


Putting decency above demands for animal cruelty

 A Minority Pastime

On the 4th May the film Minority Pastime receives its premier screening in London.

Those expected to attend the screening will be a mixture of celebrities, politicians and concerned members of the public.


The film will be a powerful statement that reflects the mood of decency within society 

For the 1st time a film will combine the issue of animal cruelty while reflecting the harm that hunts can cause to rural people. Rural people often suffer the brunt of their homes being invaded when hounds run wild in their attempt to catch the fox. They also feel intimidation caused by hunts if they speak out against them. Despite the myths the hunting lobby create 72% of the rural population are against hunting with dogs.

People who watch this film will come to two powerful conclusions.

That deliberate animal cruelty is never justified and that the rights of those who stand up for decency must be heard.

For far to many decades the hunting lobby have ridden roughshod over society. They have bullied and deceived the nation in order to carry on in the way only they see fit. When it comes to democracy it has been viewed with contempt.

Their backers have distorted their influence and importance and colluded to pander to a minority. Far from exposing sickening acts of deliberate animal cruelty they have chosen to concile the truth.

The chief backer in all of this is now David Cameron, who has allowed underhand and undemocratic practices to aid his bid for election. His reliance on pro hunting Vote OK to campaign for him in key seats threatens more that just defenceless animals. Rural policy of all kinds is now easy access for the hunting lobby. His commitment to seeking the repeal of the hunting ban shows his judgement is flawed. It clearly raisess a serious question.

Is David Cameron fit to be the leader of the nation? The answer must be no. For how can a man who sees nothing wrong in violence to animals be representative of the needs of decent society.


Visit the Minority Pastime website

Support the Hunting Act (Ban) UK and Fox in Parliament are pleased to be supporting A Minority Pastime. Be sure to look out for our film review and coming interviews.


Reading shoppers queue up to support Labour’s ban on fox-hunting

On Saturday afternoon, shoppers in Broad Street Reading were queuing up to support Labour’s ban on fox-hunting. The local Labour Party organised a survey to find out peoples’ views on whether the ban should be removed (as proposed by the Conservatives) or retained.

No less than 100% of people who participated in the survey stated that they supported Labour’s ban on fox-hunting. Yet the Conservatives’ leader, David Cameron, has pledged to dedicated Government time, if elected, to a bill abolishing the ban. Anneliese Dodds, Labour’s parliamentary candidate for Reading East, stated:

“It seems that Reading people are, if anything, even more supportive of Labour’s ban on fox-hunting than the population as a whole. Nationally around 75% of people support the ban- in Reading, it seems, virtually everyone agrees with it. Getting rid of the ban on fox-hunting is one of the very few policies that the Conservatives have come out with – alongside cutting tax for the 3,000 richest estates”.

And Councillor Bet Tickner stated: “I’ve always supported a ban on fox-hunting. This barbaric ‘sport’ belongs to Medieval days, not the 21st century. We must campaign to ensure that the ban stays in place and against the Conservatives’ objectionable plans to devote parliament’s time to abolishing it”.

Picture: Anneliese, Bet, and a fox (!) on Broad Street.  

Dr Anneliese Dodds is the Labour PPC for Reading East.


Camerons Chosen People..

Many of you thankfully would not have come across a fox hunt. For those that have we fully understand the emotions and feelings the experience generates.  Hunting with dogs is not just upsetting for it manages to go further then just distaste. 

Even now with a ban and place and the law on the side of animal welfare. We still have some in the hunting community who think society’s laws are not about them. Their arrogance and disrespect to democracy and decency is staggering. 

For the person who stumbles across a hunt. You would be right to wonder are we in 2010 or 1710…For if we are to try and match comparisons in the modern world it would be a fruitless exercise. The modern world does not reflect in the past in the way the hunters expect.  

Hunters assume behaving with arrogance akin to 17th century hunters is fine and dandy. Society however is smarter, wiser and has more compassion for animals than hunters could ever imagine. So it is staggering that despite 400 years on that ignorance is still being pandered to. 

Welcome to the world of David Cameron who talks change, but has he sights firmly set on history. 

Below is a recent video which shows hunt followers from the Heythrop Hunt. This is Camerons favourite hunt and he would dearly like to be with them. Yet this video does not only show that the Heythrop hunt care little for the law. For is also captures the sounds of them breaking it. You will hear in the video the  hounds on full cry. 

The hunt followers try to mask that reality with other noises. A rather pointless and pitiful attempt on their part. 

Full cry is the term used when the hounds are in pursuit (the sounds is the hounds as the adrenalin kicks in and they become excited and this builds into a frenzy. It is this frenzy that rips apart a fox if they catch it. It is very clear to us that on this video some poor fox is running for its life. 

This activity by the Heythrop Hunt is of course illegal. Yet do we ever hear Cameron insisting the law should be obeyed? Well law is seems to Cameron should only be enforced if he personally agrees with it. He does not like the ban so therefore cares little if his chums break it. 

Perhaps he should ask his hunting chums to wear a hoodie. At least then he could go round and give them a hug? 

This video shows the disturbing level of ignorance and aggression that exists amongst some hunt followers. This of course is mild in comparison to the criminal assaults. GBH, ABH and criminal damage that hunts have caused across the UK. 

The notion that hunters are pillars of the community and law-abiding. Well the sheer number of court cases against them prove that’s just another myth. Not all hunters are violent but it does not mean others are not. 

These very people are Camerons people. They are not the pensioner who seek to keep warm in a cold spell. They are not the apprentice who achieved a better job or a standard of life. They are not the decent person who goes out of their way to help their community. 

Continue reading ‘Camerons Chosen People..’


Hunting ban anniversary – MP warns ‘keep cruelty history’

On the anniversary of the Hunting Act, 18th February, Labours Angela Smith, MP for Basildon and East Thurrock, has issued a warning that the Conservative Party is committed to repealing the Act if it wins the General Election.

Angela said, “Parliament spent many hours debating the detail of the ban on hunting, to produce the Act we have. Now if he were to win the election later this year David Cameron wants to bring back the pursuit of foxes, deer and hares by packs of dogs – I had hoped that in the 21st century we had finally consigned these barbaric activities to the dustbin of history.”

Angela added, “the vast majority of the public support the ban on hunting and want to see our wildlife protected – the vast majority of Conservative candidates would bring back hunting and allow wildlife to be pursued to the death for sport. I hope people will question their election candidates very carefully on this matter. Not many issues are a clear cut ‘yes’ or ‘no’, but on this one it is very easy – either we support the current ban or not.”

Before her election as an MP, Angela built up an expertise on the subject as an officer of the League Against Cruel Sports.

Angela can be conntacted via her website


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.” [ and] 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. []

 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. []

Catch up zone

What’s hot

Fox in Parliament on Twitter

RSS News from the Leuage Against Cruel Sports

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Fox in Parliament Stats

  • 50,691 hits & views

Flickr Photos


July 2018
« Feb    

Top Clicks

  • None