Derby MP Chris Williamson speaks out against hunting in Commons debate
DERBY North MP Chris Williamson branded some fox-hunters "violent thugs" as he accused senior ministers of "tacitly approving" hunts breaking the law, during a Commons debate.
Mr Williamson called the debate in the wake of continued support from several Tory MPs for reform of the Hunting Act 2004, which bans hunting foxes with dogs.
In the Coalition Agreement struck in 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron promised MPs a free vote on overturning the ban as soon as parliamentary time was available.
Mr Williamson said he believed the Tory proposals encouraged hunts to break the law and that this was leading to sometimes violent incidents involving hunters and anti-hunt demonstrators.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
He said during the House of Commons debate: "I am not suggesting that everyone who participates in hunting is an arrogant, violent thug.
"Indeed, I am sure that most hunt followers obey the law.
"However, worryingly, a significant minority are arrogant, violent thugs, which is why urgent action is needed to tackle this flagrant disregard for the law."
One prominent hunt supporter, Tory Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire MP Simon Hart, responded that he had "spent 20 years compiling a list of violence against legitimate country people and hunt supporters, particularly by members of the hunt saboteurs in balaclavas".
Mr Williamson said he believed the "rhetoric of senior ministers" was "tantamount to tacit approval for those who are transgressing the Hunting Act to continue to do so."
He added: "I am sure that ministers would not encourage people to break the law.
"But does the minister not understand how the hunting fraternity might take that as tacit approval to break the Hunting Act?"
Tory Minister of State for Policing and Criminal Justice Damian Green said that "every party at every election makes promises to change the law".
He said: "Nobody takes that as tacit approval to break the law. If they did, no party would, responsibly, ever promise to change the law at any election and, therefore, there would be no point in having elections."
Mr Green added that the Government was "not prioritising reform of the Hunting Act at the moment".
After the debate, Mr Williamson said he was pleased it was not a priority but he believed there was enough Commons support for the current law for proposals to bring back hunting with dogs to be rejected by MPs.
He said: "There are sufficient numbers in the House to vote down any attempt to repeal the act. There are enough Tory MPs who would vote with us. We will continue to press the Government in relation to the lawful activities of people going about their business observing hunts."
Nobody at The Meynell and South Staffordshire Hunt, which operates in Derbyshire, was available to comment.
14 Comments
View all
by Derby_born
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 9:36PM
“@ spondon, re your comment: "Despite your capital letters it in no way changes my view which I share with the Environment Secretary Owen Paterson when he said "Having looked at all the evidence over many years, I am utterly convinced that badger control is the right thing to do, and indeed the higher than expected badger numbers only serve to underline the need for urgent action."
What evidence is Owen Patterson referring to? The evidence he is ignoring is the Defra report on the Governments Policy on Bovine TB and Badger control in England Dec 2011 which refers to the, Randomised Badger Culling Trial, RBCT , a government commissioned scientific study which came to the following conclusion.
"10.48 On the basis of our careful review of all currently available evidence, we conclude
that badger culling is unlikely to contribute positively to the control of cattle TB in
Britain".
http://tinyurl.com/augroe2
See more on this at the Conservatives against the Badger Cul website http://tinyurl.com/asq8b44
There is also strong opposition against fox hunting that has cross party support, as this website demonstrates: http://tinyurl.com/azgnuag
Grey areas in politics where all sides come together for the common good!”
by dave12548
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 6:16PM
“What a hapless and useless bag of wind. Just goes to show....you get what you vote Derby North. Lets just hope that you have learned your lesson and that this clown is not re-elected at the next general election.”
by Neo_MadBadger
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 5:37PM
“I am in full agreement with Derby_born and Sarah123's comments. I have to also state that the foxes that I sometimes see on my street will scarper at the slightest. Perhaps the foxes that Janine has seen have become accustomed to humans because someone has been feeding them, as was suggested in the case of the fox that recently attacked that poor child.”
by spondon
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 3:48PM
“@Derby Resident: I have to disagree with your assertion that "the ONLY solution is for a programme of innoculation of ALL cattle to be undertaken. I'm sure you believe what you write but it is only an opinion just as mine is. When the greatest experts on the subject disagree it is not suprising to find a Derby Resident and a Spondon resident also disagree.
Despite your capital letters it in no way changes my view which I share with the Environment Secretary Owen Paterson when he said "Having looked at all the evidence over many years, I am utterly convinced that badger control is the right thing to do, and indeed the higher than expected badger numbers only serve to underline the need for urgent action."”
by spondon
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 2:31PM
“@ DerbyResident; you merely state the problem I am sugesting a solution ie, culling. I did not refer to the historical context only the present position. I was not stating which animal is the carrier of TB merely the erradication of it. The main point of my post was to state that I felt that Oscar had it right and I stand by his assertion.
"Both animals need controlling in the wild with the TB in cattle and the high number of urban foxes starting to become a great problem in some areas." To make a ritual and social event out of ripping a dumb animal to shreds and glorying in it barbaric.”
by DerbyResident
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 1:58PM
“by spondon
Both animals need controlling in the wild with the TB in cattle"
THe evidence clearly shows that it is the badgers who are infected by cattle, not the other way round.
Badgers are territorial and do not stray from their home territory. Therefore they do not spread TB around the country. Cattle on the other hand ARE moved around the country, carrying the disease with them.
As for urban foxes. Foxes are an indignous species. It is man who has driven them from the countryside into towns by destroying their natural habitat.”
by spondon
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 1:02PM
“Ocar Wilde had it spot on. His definition of the hunt as ''the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable.'' All the arguments put forward about a humane end and selective culling by hunts are simply a smokescreen to justify barbaric acts against animals.
I have no issue with the killing of foxes or badgers for that matter it is the way it is carried out that is the problem. Both animals need controlling in the wild with the TB in cattle and the high number of urban foxwes starting to become a great problem in some areas. For once the posts seem to be in general agreement on this matter but I suspect it will soon be hijacked by the usual suspects.”
by janine2011
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 12:14PM
“Sarah123 I live near the city centre and have seen two foxes at night/early hours of the morning, the pair of them are as brazen as comes and will stand their ground. Neither of them are timid or run at the sight of people, if they are eating what has been dropped on the ground they continue to do so instead of taking it and running off.”
by HateTheGame
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 11:49AM
“It's a blood sport that has no place in 21st Century Britain.”
by SarahL123
Wednesday, February 13 2013, 10:59AM
“@ Janine2011
Foxes are scavengers, not hunters, so of course they have little need to hunt for food. The reason we have more urban foxes is down to our own waste disposal habits, and the continuing destruction of their natural habitats.
As for fear of humans, the numerous foxes we see in our garden and surrounding area only show themselves at night, and sprint into the undergrowth at the first sight of a human, so I'm not sure where you get the idea they have no fear? It is possible to encourage occasional foxes to become less afraid - regularly leaving food out for them etc - but they are the exception not the rule.
Of course that is all completely irrelevant to the story, which is in regards to fox hunting...the barbaric chasing down and killing of a wild animal, by another animal, trained by humans. I know who I have more respect for. Since the change in law I have witnessed the Meynell hunt in action, and have even had their hunt organiser refer to a 'cubbing' meet (if you don't know what that is, google it) - not only do these people show no respect for the law, they try to justify their actions using spurious claims that do nothing but prove their own arrogance.
I have no sympathy for violent thugs, whether hunt supporters or saboteurs, but I have less sympathy for upper class twits, (and wannabe upper class twits) who cannot see what is wrong with their version of 'sport'.
Thankfully we still have some MPs willing to speak out (even if it is Chris Williamson!)”