Tories showing their true face again.....anything to help the Toffee nosed, Eton Bunch you went to school with eh Mr Cameron !! What's next reduce the tax on the high earners....oh you already said you going to do that as well !! Maybe introduce a bedroom tax, so that the elderly and poor can't afford to live in their houses anymore..Oh that's right you already done that !!!
Just hope the above gets plenty of coverage....as it finally shows the true face of the Tories. Nothing is to much trouble for the Eton Bunch !!!
To be fair it doesn't seem to me that the Tories are doing anything different to wht they have done before. It certainly isn't some sort of clandestine manifesto promise that no one suspected.
Let's also remember that they didn't want the hunting ban in the first place.
It's the same commitement as they made in their manifesto for the GE of 2005 and 2010. And despite winning in 2010 they haven't done a days work towards repealing the Act, so I'm afraid sensationalist headlines do not change my opinion that this Act will remain as statute.
Sorry GnV, maybe I didn't make myself clear.
The Telegraph story is not actually news. The proposal to reverse the hunting ban was part of the Tory manifesto in 2005 and 2010 and therefore it is not a change of direction for the party, or a sensationalist as the headline appears it to be.
Well, there you go Trev. Just reinforces the view you can't believe everything you read in the papers...
Today's 'news', tomorrow's sausage wrapper...
The Telegraph is a strong Tory supporting paper....none stronger...so hardly sensationist !!
I just thought we had become civilised enough, not to tear animals apart for entertainment. Foxes indeed need to be controlled, but far more humane and easier ways. What's next the legalisation of Badger baiting !!!
With the hunting act currently in the news as today is its 10 year anniversary, I see a lot of news reports and social media asking should the ban stay or be lifted? So I thought I would share my views here. For me the question is a more fundamental one. Has the hunting act done anything for animal welfare? Firstly hunting has not really been fully banned, for instance, you can use two hounds to flush a fox from cover, provided you intend to shoot it. Here suddenly we have introduced a gun and the chance for human error. If then the fox is wounded two hounds stand far less chance in catching and dispatching the wounded fox. If that fox should go to ground, you can not use terriers to flush it out or dig it out, it has to be left to die, how ever long that should take. Is that an animal welfare improvment? You can however use terriers to flush out foxes from underground if it is for the protection of game birds for shooting. You can hunt a rabbit with a pack of dogs but not a hare, unless it is wounded. You can hunt a rat with a pack of dogs but not a mouse. When I look at this I do not see a law based around animal welfare, but a law designed to stop certain people hunting certain animals in a certain way. The question I rarely see asked is how do the alternatives, which have filled the void of hunting with hound’s measure up in the animal welfare scale. No fox’s lives will have been saved by this law, other methods will have been used, but do many people care what other methods are used to control numbers? I personally would like to see it replaced with a wild mammals welfare bill, something along the lines of the Donoughue Principle, a bill drawn up by Labour peer Lord Donoughue. Something along these lines that would give all wild mammals protection from deliberate and/or unnecessary cruelty, not just selected animals. Lord Donoughue has championed two parliamentary bills based on this principle; both were well received in the House of Lords by all sides, as well as the Country Land and Business Association, the National Farmers Union and the Countryside Alliance. With a bill like this cruelty would be tested in a court of law, just as they are for domestic animals, on the basis of evidence, not opinion or assumption. Sadly when Lembit Öpik introduced the same Bill into the House of Commons in early 2004 it was talked out, probably as it would have made an anti-hunting bill redundant. I would like to see animal welfare at the heart of this sort of legislation, and I am not sure that this is the case with the hunting act.
