Could fox-hunting be the winning formula for Labour?
December 26th, 2009
Is it more ammunition for the class war strategy?
According to ConHome, at the time of July’s Norwich North by election the above was an official Labour flyer used in the failed defence of that seat.
The approach was also used in the Eddisbury by election in 1999 when the climate was much more clement for NuLab.
Well according to the Indy this morning there are, indeed, Labour plans to make an apparent commitment by David Cameron to repeal the controversial 2004 act into an election issue to run alongside the IHT campaign.
Is this going to stick and is it going to help Labour get more of its voters out on election day?
Did it, for instance, make a difference in Norwich where Labour’s 2005 vote of 21,097 was cut down to 6,243? Given the circumstances of that contest it could be argued that it might have just got a few more people out and the size of Labour’s defeat could have been confined just a little.
The down-side is that it could motivate those on the other side of the argument.
The problem with the fox-hunting ban is that although most people have got views on the issue and support the act there’s not that much evidence that many feel strongly enough about it to influence their voting.
December 26th is almost always a slow news day and it will be interesting to see if the Labour moves are used as a peg to report on the standard TV bulletin coverage of the Boxing Day hunts. Maybe that’s the whole point?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
- “December 26th is almost always a slow news day… “
Well, this is the No.2 item in the UK section of the BBC online website:
‘Minister Hiliary Benn fights to keep hunting ban’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8430642.stm
The BBC just loves The Bunker.
On balance probably no effect. As many will be turned off by emotional blackmail as will be swayed by it.
There is a wee tidbit about Labour’s internal polling in the Independent leader Mike links to:
And here is the Hilary Benn article that the Independent and the BBC are using as an excuse for a free Labour PPB:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/hilary-benn-the-public-supports-the-ban-so-what-are-the-tories-playing-at-1850410.html
… and Grice in the Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/now-brown-declares-class-war-on-hunting-1850407.html
This is pretty desperate stuff for the Labour Party. After nearly 13 years of Labour government, is this really the very best that they can come up with? The Blairite project to appeal to The Centre is now officially dead. Therefore, Labour are going to be out of government for a very, very long time indeed.
No idea, but i would think it could be slightly confusing to launch a campaign against the Conservatives “reintroducing” fox hunting, against a backdrop of a lot of people going out on Boxing Day and, er, Fox Hunting!
- “The fight for the fourth place in the final run-off is very tight.”
Richard Nabavi, Yellow Submarine and David Herdson are almost certainly all through to the final round. And deservedly so.
However, this is the battle for 4th place:
- Easterross 184 votes
- PtP 183 votes
- Plato 167 votes
Personally, I voted for Easterross (among others) as it is such a pleasure to have a fellow knowledgeable Scot on the threads. Mark Sutherland-Fisher is one of the very few non-SNP PBers who has a profound understanding of Scottish society, culture and public life, and it is a great pleasure to read his perspective.
However, less selfishly, I think that PtP is probably the more valuable PBer: he is one of the core group of punters who make this site so distinctive in the blogosphere. For example, if I wanted to talk with pleasant, deeply knowlegable Scottish Tories, there are actually one or two other blogs I could visit. However, I am not aware of anywhere else I could get the invaluable pricing information which PB provides, in the form of PtP and the other members of his gang.
So, what I am trying to say, is I voted for a fellow Scot (on largely parochial grounds) rather than a better-qualified candidate! I suspect that I am far from alone in such parochial voting behaviour: tens of thousands of my countrymen are probably going to cast a vote for Gordon Brown next May, as a fellow Scot, despite the fact that they know in their heart of hearts that he is a lamentably poor PM who does not have Scotland’s best interests at heart.
“The down-side is that it could motivate those on the other side of the argument.”
There doesn’t seem much of a downside to me. I think it’s safe to assume that the vast majority of people who support this vile activity are Tory voters through and through. I would guess the vast majority are filthy rich, own huge estates and would never consider voting for the Labour party - not even Tony Blair’s New Labour.
This is probably why fox hunting was finally banned. Labour realized they were not going to lose any votes over it, so they finally did the right thing and banned it. It was a popular decision at the time by and large.
Obviously fox hunting is not going to be the issue that determines the winner of the next election. But the issue does re-affirm popular belief that the Tories are still the nasty party.
3. “In fact, Labour might make the threat to the wellbeing of foxes more of an election issue than it does inheritance tax, since polls have suggested that Tory plans for the latter were not as unpopular as Labour strategists thought”
If Labour had always thought the pledge of IHT was unpopular then i could understand their mistake. But i have always found it strange that they think that public opinion has changed significantly from when they were originally so scared of the potency of the issue that they ducked a General Election and brought in (since reversed) their own IHT threshold increase.
I don’t see any reason to think that opinion has changed significantly, and any changed stance by Labour can only be seen in the context of a “core vote” strategy ie. public opinion hasn’t changed, just the part of the electorate which Labour is trying to target.
6. Richie Rich - “Obviously fox hunting is not going to be the issue that determines the winner of the next election.”
So, pray tell, what exactly is the issue that is going to return Gordon Brown to Downing Street in triumph?
The problem for Labour is that we are only a few weeks away from the start of the GE campaign, and you guys are still scrambling around trýing desperately to find an issue to differentiate yourselves from the Tories. That fact in and of itself speaks absolute volumes.
Richie, your team are going down. Get used to the idea.
If anybody out there is wondering why on earth Gordon Brown and his fellow Scots in the Bunker are idiotically abandoning Blair’s key appeal to The Centre (aka Middle England), and retreating to the classic (losing) Core Vote Strategy, then look no further than the early life of the PM.
His PhD thesis (which took 10 years to complete) was entitled “The Labour Party and Political Change in Scotland 1918-29″, and in 1986 he published “Maxton: A Biography” (Mainstream Publishing; ISBN 978-1-85158-042-2)
So, if you want to understand the man, then take a look at his heroes. Read, and you shall understand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Maxton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Clydeside
If you understand the way Brown’s mind works, then you will understand why he is about to lose England. Big style.
The man just doesn’t like Blair’s Middle England voters. And boy oh boy oh boy: those voters know it.
Here is a wee piece of trivia which also throws some light on Brown’s intellectual milieu: Gordon Brown was the biographer of his hero James Maxton, but who did Maxton write biographies of?
One of Maxton’s heroes was the anti-immigrant campaigner (the advocate of the concept of Scottish Jobs for Scottish Workers) Keir Hardie.
The other was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror
Boxing Day foxhunters: take note!
Labour should keep quiet about fox hunting. It was a dreadful example of it’s own governing incompetence. It was an issue that took up too much parliament time, and was not important to many people. The argument was not won, but was was driven by class envy and predjudice - never very pretty. Then, the legislation was ineffective and badly planned. The winners in this issue? there are none (not even the foxes).
Foxes — is this a Labour Party strategy or is Hilary Benn keeping his name in the frame for any post-Brown party elections?
More worrying are reports that the terrorist who tried to blow up that American plane might be a British student (at UCL).
As a Conservative, I think it would be a mistake for David Cameron to repeal the hunting ban. It would be giving a hostage to political fortune, quite unnecessarily.
Since the ban, hunts have never been so well-attended. Hunting goes from strength to strength, as anyone connected with the sport will confirm. Three cheers for the ban. It’s been spectacularly unsuccessful and the police have now abandoned any pretence of enforcing the absurd legislation, which, as I see Richie Rich implicitly acknowledges, was entirely motivated by class war and political dividing lines.
RR’s surreal notion that hunt supporters are mostly filthy rich and own vast estates is most amusing. Richie, you couldn’t be more wrong. Are you sure you’re for real and not just a figment of someone’s fertile imagination? Someone who posts to PB under another name?
6: You’re speaking from a position of ignorance. There are a hugeys number of people which are anti-ban and do not live in huge houses and are firthy rich. Many ‘working-class’ people attend hunts and its thought well our throughout the countryside.
400,000 attended the Countryside Alliance march in london. These people which Labour has ignored throughout its goverenment.
I’m not hugely pro-hunt myself, but I understand the need for the countryside to be managed and that includes wildlife to be controlled. Thats not always cuddly and fluffy. In addition this law has proved to be unworkable and simply a bad law.
11. “It was an issue that took up too much parliament time, and was not important to many people.”
And won’t that be exactly the problem for the Tories if they, weirdly, make revisiting the issue one of their early priorities for government?
I do seem to recall the pro-hunting lobby spending a great deal of time refusing to engage with the issue, and instead relying on the line - “oh, this is just trivia, a waste of valuable parliamentary time”. An argument that was always a huge hostage to fortune. At least when Labour introduced the ban they had public opinion on their side - the Tories won’t even have that luxury.
The offer of a review of the Hunting Bill does not motivate many votes one way or the other. But it is massively motivational to a few activists who will leaflet from dawn to dusk and canvas for Cameron. Many pro-hunting Labour MPs were targeted by pro-Hunting folk in 2005 and lost their seats. This time around an army of 30,000 pro-hunters might canvas round the clock for Cameron. That would have an impact
14. Let’s face facts. The tories policy on fox hunting is a true reflection on everything they stand for. Fox hunting is cruel, it’s inhumane, and it inflicts misery and death on the defenceless. So the tories are thoroughly pleased to support it.
There are people that say the world’s population needs to be managed too. They say there are too many of god’s people on earth. So would you support toff’s hunting and killing working class peasants?
I understand why country Tories want to repeal the ban, but I really hope they don’t.
Whatever the actual practical idiocy of the legislation, “banning hunting” was popular. It connected on an emotional level.
We no longer allow dogfighting, and various other “urban” forms of animal cruelty. I see no reason why the country equivalents shouldn’t be banned too.
However, this is a losing battle - the fact that Cameron himself likes hunting and really hated it when it was banned means it will be repealed unless, possibly, there is a hung Parliament.
The following article by Cameron from 2002 should be compulsory reading when discussing this subject - hunting obviously matters hugely to Cameron, on a purely visceral level.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/mar/22/davidcameron.politicalcolumnists
Nevertheless, together a massive majority of the population, it certainly won’t be an issue on which my vote will be decided one way or another.
I rather like and respect the foxes that I see and occasionally surprise with my quiet Red Indian’s tread on solo country walks. I do not want them persecuted or hounded. And fox hunting sounds like a good topic for punters.
But should such an isssue affect the election of a whole government?
There are really big things to worry about. For instance our libel laws and their effect on democracy and the progress of social attitudes towards science.
http://www.libelreform.org/
17: Population ‘management’ doesn’t involve killing people, but merely by promotion of birth control and free contraception.
Foxes do exist as a pest for many farmers, and numbers do need to be controlled, and yes, that includes killing him. Thats what happens in the countryside. Now maybe that can be done better using posion, or shooting them, rather than hunting with dogs, but thats a matter of debate.
18. “The following article by Cameron from 2002 should be compulsory reading when discussing this subject - hunting obviously matters hugely to Cameron, on a purely visceral level.”
Good grief. If that’s the real Cameron from the days when he didn’t need to keep his guard up, he comes across as a thoroughly unpleasant man. Should be required reading for the entire electorate.
I’ve always wondered why Cameron doesn’t use fox hunting as a way to promote his more general policy of localism. Simply pass a law such that it is local councils that have the right to ban (or not) hunting.
Then areas where hunting is unpopular, like Islington and Lambeth, can ban it, and the rural areas cab be left in peace.
(2nd ever comment)
20. Poisoning can kill the wrong animals, and inflict long slow painful deaths. Shooting can easily wound or maim but not kill. Killing with dogs is 100% effective at every attempt.
If fox populations are not controlled, starvation drives foxes to take more risks (even attacking humans/children in extremis) and many die from hunger.
The biggest killer of foxes is traffic, and many foxes are hit but not killed by cars etc. to die a lingering death.
The best dogs to kill foxes are a cross breed between fox hound and greyhound. But they’re so fast that the ‘hunt’ is over crossing just one field. The people who kill foxes for farmers use this cross-breed. They kill every fox in sight, which doesn’t get underground.
The ones that go underground are best killed with terriers.
But how you make a law about such matter defeats me.
re 19. Well said Tom. There are so many bigger issues - the one you mention being a case in point. the whole concept of free speech in the UK has been totally undermined by the failure of successive Labour and Tory governments to tackle the libel laws.
That libel tourism is now a big issue is a disgrace.
Why cannot Ritchie put his campaigning energies into that?
Foxhunting FFS? It is like Labour playing “Ole!” football when they are four-nil down…
I am very strongly against fox-hunting (although I’d be happy for lottery money to go to drag hunts). But the notion that it would remotely swing my vote? Nah… That is about the economy. Labour inherited a strong and strengthening economy. They will leave it f*cked. You break it, you pay for it.
Never liked fox hunting but to me it now represents the freedoms that Labour has outlawed. It just goes into the list of hundreds of laws designed to make the majority subservient to a left wing communist govt and its lackeys.
Bring it back but instead of a fox, let them chase down the left wingers. Lets have Britain back!
It is interesting that Conservatives who are usually populist and are the first to cite where an opiniom poll shows that the majority of voters support their policy(s) suddenly ignore that in the case of fox hunting where poll after poll shows that an overwhelming majority of voters support the ban and want it to continue .
Whilst it is true that most voters would not see this as a defining issue as to how they would vote in a GE , there are some on both sides of the argument who would do so . It was one of the few issues that my late wife felt strongly enough about to get her to the polling booth and vote against fox hunting and therefore against the Conservatives .
this election is about middle England ridding itself of a bunch of Scottish incompetents and never making the same mistake again.it will be an election of Nationalism and NL will lose very badly indeed.never again will a Scotsman hold the position of PM of the UK.
Ho ho ho, if that’s the best they’ve got then they are even more desperate then I thought. I agree with Toms, I don’t particularly like fox hunting, but personally I don’t like the bigots and thugs who campaign against it and I don’t like the way the government ignored the advice it asked for when it banned it. But this just isn’t an issue. It’s never once come up when I’ve been canvassing. A free vote is the best option for DC.
On the libel laws, I think it right that people should be protected from journos running tenuous stories and downright lies. Journalists don’t give a damn for anyone else’s rights but they squeal like a pig if you threaten theirs. That said, libel laws have no place in science.
Now I’m off to join the Thatto Heath Hunt! Merry boxing day!
22- if that’s your second comment you have a very high success rate. I agree with you there, I reckon that would be a great idea.
22, good idea, Bonzo. Post more
22 The last opinion poll conducted by Ipsos Mori in October found that even in rural areas 72% wanted fox hunting to remain illegal .
32, a majority want the death penalty back. A majority also wanted a referendum on Lisbon and to leave the EU.
27: Is there any polictical party for which that charge cannot be laid against Mark? I didn’t see the Lib Dems stand up for the referendum on the Lisbon treaty when the popular opinion wanted it. Yet they’re more than willing to go ‘popular’ when it suits them. The same for Labour as well.
Majority of the country is probably for the reintroduction of the death penalty as well, but thats not going to happen.
6. ‘I would guess the vast majority are filthy rich, own huge estates…’
Richie Rich, you’re either a troll or a complete idiot. Do some more research into the demographics of people who attend hunts.
I’m not bothered either way whether the law’s changed under a new government, but posting falsehoods (or outright lies) simply serves to weaken the cause of those in favour of the ban.
The ban on fox hunting (and its repeal) are trivial matters given the problems this country is facing. There are real dangers in any party wasting time talking about this: the public will want parties to focus on the big issues.
Some unconnected observations:
1) Hungarians look at you as if you are mad when you tell them that fox hunting is banned in Britain. The debate in Britain on animal rights is very local.
2) Richie Rich, I will stick my hand up and say that I am one of those people who believes that the world’s population is out of control and needs to be brought down. So, by the way, is David Attenborough. I can’t speak for him though I imagine he would feel the same way, but I would be horrified if the measures taken restricted population by killing a single living person.
3) As a developed country that is as overpopulated as anywhere, we should be setting an example, not planning for further population growth.
32. If the 72% figure is accurate, then many “rural” areas would of course implement a ban with the popular support of their electorate. Westminster can meanwhile be getting on with dealing with it’s own problems.
Where there is doubt on local opinion, I’d actually be happy for councils to have a referendum and let the people decide.
37 Bonzo
That won’t work. The issue is that foxhunting is currently a criminal activity, and only central government can make criminal law.
In English law it is not possible, as far as I know, to go to jail if you get caught doing something in Peckham, and not go to jail if you do the same thing in Witney.
An MPs expenses story: apparently investigations are being held up because MPs have protected themselves from whistleblowers
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/6840857/MPs-expenses-formal-investigations-into-questionable-claims-hampered-by-block-on-anonymous-evidence.html
I’m not particularly pro/anti hunting but I don’t see why it needs to be a social event. That’s the side of it that I find deeply unpleasant.
If the Eu making 70% of our laws is not an election issue, then fox hunting will be even further down the food chain. The main motivation for repeal is the huge amount of hunting activists who will come forward to work for the Conservatives in marginal seats. It will be an impact, I can assure you.
33-And the majority was in favour of s28. The likes of NPMP are in favour of Swiss styles referendums in Switzerland but not apparently for the riff raff in Britain. (except in the 2005 manifesto it seems)
But I agree, when the great issues of the day are decided it’s not fox hunting that will sway the debate. Or the rope or unsuitable adoptions. It’ll be the way Labour have destroyed god knows how many years of economic management in a twinkling of the eye. How they are seemingly intent on pursuing a scorched earth policy to punish the country for not voting Labour. How they have attempted to change the nature and society of this coutry by subterfuge. Etc.
36-1) ha ha! There are so many issues local to the UK that make us look weird and not particularly wonderful to outsiders.
38. IANAL but what about bylaws restricting (for e.g.) drinking in public places? These can I understand apply to very specific areas.
Surely the point of localism is that that laws are set to match local needs and priorities. Another other way climbs a logical slope until we arrive at one world government.
41-May make a difference in LD/Con marginals. How many rural seats do Labour hold? Even less in England. But I guess it can influence activists in these Tory rural seats to put in time and effort in neighbouring suburban seats. Like Broxtowe. And Worcester - is Foster still around?
44. They get drafted into target seats, they organise themselves in a fairly professional manor.
Who on earth would actually vote in a general election, an election that will decide the fate of a nation and its 30m people for five, on the grounds that foxes might get hunted (or not)???? I can’t for the life of me understand the passion fox hunting arouses, on either side, I might add. For me, it’d be hard to find a more trivial non issue.
46 “its 30m people”
What have you done with the other half????
“the estimated population of the UK in July of 2009 was projected to be 61,126,832″
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_population_of_the_United_Kingdom
Morning all… Merry Xmas
SA in a bit of bother 15/2
41 I disagree , the majority of people in rural areas as in the country as a whole are for a hunting ban , I agree that few people will vote on this issue primarily but of those few that do the likelihood is those for a ban already mostly don’t vote Conservative and those for the repeal already do vote Conservative .
47. Sorry, brain still foggy with sleep…. and other things….
Morning all and hope you all had a very pleasant Christmas.
the big news this morning is that Huntingdon (as well as Kempton) is on and I shall be on my way there any minute. I expect John Major will be there, so if you have any questions for him, let me know.
May I join the plea for Bonzo to post more often. That’s a great suggestion of his (or hers) so I guess it has no chance of being implemented, whether practical or not.
Enjoy the day!
Banning foxhunting is like making cannabis a Class B drug rather than Class C.
It sounds good to the ignorant numpties for whom words are all … but in real actions it is worthless..
A typical example for people who think passing a law solves a problem.
Like most PPCs I’m sure I have been bombarded with emails by anti-hunt activists. On the other hand I am also aware that strongly pro-hunt people are helping the Conservatives in selected seats (in the SW Exeter and Somerton and Frome).
I believe that those anti-hunt figures come from a poll that would have Mike spitting his breakfast all over the screen. The questions were rather loaded. Nonetheless there is still a majority against fox hunting even in rural seats if my surveying is anything to go by.
Although it is an extremely low priority for legislation I think Tories upthread are kidding themselves if they thing it won’t hurt them especially in urban/suburban seats. After all if it is such low priority why are Tories giving it parliamentary time.
My prediction is that the issue will actually help Ben Bradshaw retain Exeter - I think his Tory opponent will be better off without pro-hunt assistance which BB will certainly use in his campaign.
(PS to repeal the whole act would also permit stag and hare hunting against which I am sure there are enormous majorities everywhere - Cameron needs to clear that one up very soon).
I think it will be very good for labour and not so good for the tories. The “they haven’t changed” will work, it is a distraction from the troubles of everyday life for most urban people, and it shows labour as “kind”. The pro-hunting crowd will do Cameron no favours. I’d ban industrial agriculture long before banning hunting, and given the law is ineffective, would be happier if it were off the books. Having listened to people being charitable to GB over Xmas lunch I fear that there are people talking their book here.
Its Boxing Day, surely the biggest fox hunting day in the year. Used to go to watch the hunt set off each boxing day when I was a kid. Its just a good way of filling up a slow news day but keeping within in the seasonal spirit.
49 I agree. Net effect either way nil to the election generally. Not sure it can’t make a difference to individual seats though. The Lib Dems split perfectly in half on the vote. I imagine without looking the more rural a seat represented by a Lib Dem the more likely they were to vote against and the more surburban or urban the more likely to vote in favour. Such a pattern would indicate an effect in some way or other.
Happy St.Stephen’s Day !!
I’m being allowed 30 mins on here today - Mrs Jack W’s Christmas present to me !!
Voting for the last PotY nomination place is very tight - Easterross and PtP tied !! …. now where shall I advise Jacobite tie-breakers to vote - Easterrross is a fine Scot and er …. PtP wears fine fish net stockings. My duty is clear !!
Vote for ChristinaD - Scot’s Tory Totty at it’s finest !!
Marxist-Leninists on the site should note that Friedrich Engels was passionate about fox hunting (he subscribed to the Cheshire Hunt). Punters should note that jump racing in this country is underpinned by the point-to-points which are run entirely by the hunts. And everyone should note that this issue is always headline news on Boxing Day because nothing else happens. If it feels like a non-issue today (and it does) it will be invisible on any other day.
And it may backfire spectacularly - always a possibility with a Brown led party. Because its subtext may well come across as: vote Labour for another five years of banning things.
Wouldn’t go hunting myself, however managing the countryside by keeping the fox populations under control are dear to my heart.
Top predators cause big problems when they become too prevalent and I’d much rather a certain death from dogs, rather than the inherintly patchy nature of poisons/trapping or shooting.
I’d liken it to an air-war - it may make it easier to keep the people at home happy as no soldiers die [no nasty reality to face], but it’s almost always more indiscriminate/horrible for those on the receiving end.
If foxes had scaly tails or eight legs this wouldn’t be an issue.
I’m in favour of a free vote - and Bonzo’s idea is an excellent use of localism.
And if Labour are seriously planning to use this as a tactic - HAHAHHAHA - to coin an expression ‘it’s worse than we thought’
I will hold fire on this topic until David Cameron has made a comment on hunting with hounds and this could be one of his most difficult comments to make, partly because of the Countryside Alliance.
I like to think of the Countryside Alliance as the militant wing of the Tory party.
This shady group started out as the British Field Sports Society – rebranded to the ‘Countryside Alliance’. Hunting is then rebranded to ‘country pursuits’. Cubbing is then rebranded to ‘Autumn Hunting’. I can hardly wait for next years’ theme. Will Hare-coursing become ‘field tennis’?
Personally I’ve never really been able to get wound up by fox hunting, regarding those who do on both sides of the argument a little odd. But that’s not the same as it not mattering in an election, some people clearly do care a great deal about it, its effect regional (in partic SW) and concentrated in a few seats.
As for the politics of it, well of course it makes the Tories look more stereotypical, theres no point denying that.
Anyone who thinks a Tory Admin will benefit from a load of Rees Moggs going on about foxes on TV for years is a fool, and I’m sure Dave hopes that no photographs of him hunting turn up between now and the election.
Wibblers link at 18 exhibits the unpleasant, arrogant, pre fatherhood, pro section 28 stage in Camerons life which ‘m sure all voters hope has been truly left behind.
The Tories plan to set up a Hunting Quango.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/htg/6874989/Regulator-to-be-set-up-to-monitor-return-to-legalised-hunting.html
**** BETTING POST ****
The “STJOHN” deluxe betting service is operational today. (St.John’s, The Jumps, Occasional Horseracing Nod.)
3 tips so far this season. All placed, with the last two gallant seconds and all returned a small profit.
Today it’s a bet with Totesport, betting WITHOUT Kauto Star:
1 point each way Imperial Commander at 11/4.
Good luck and happy punting.
58 Constan T. “Marxist-Leninists on the site ….”
Surely one of the most hopeful posts this year !! …. and most certainly in severe danger from Tory Hunters here !!
Tally Ho Engels.
It says much for the Labour government that parliament spent more time debating foxhunting during its 12+ years than any other single piece of legislation or putative legaislation, as the real bill wasn’t brought forward for ages after 1997.
The reason of course is that it was useful red meat to throw the left when things got sticky. Unfortunately, holding debates on the principle can only last so long and so eventually legislation had to be brought forward - though considering how long the debates had been going on, it was particularly ineffective once introduced. The passing of the Act has certainly renewed support for hunting in those areas where it’s carried out but of more political import, it’s rendered useless a previously effective tactic to keep the left happy. It may or may not be coincidence - see the excellent and very astute post from Stuart at [9] as to why it might have happened anyway - but since the hunting ban was introduced, Labour’s drifted steadily leftwards in other areas, perhaps in part to compensate?
62 stjohn. Kinkell sends his thanks for the crossword.
60 - If the Countryside Alliance had a little more to say on rural housing, jobs, shops and pubs I’d take them a little more seriously.
As you point out they’re little more than a single issue pressure group with a few bolt on extras.
40. Dack, is it socialising in principle you object to, or do you just not like to socialise yourself?
65. Cheers Jack W. Hope he enjoyed it.
Happy St Boxing’s Day.
I note that class war is back on again today. Yay!
I do wish those indecisive leftie tossers would make their mind up if they want a class war or not. I’ve already dug the trenches and installed pointy stick-based fortifications.
David Cameron is happy to sing the praises of the hunting community and has promised to repeal the Hunting Act if the Tories win the General Election. I would like to know if he approves of a callous, unprovoked and vicious attack by ten hunt supporters on two innocent people which could easily have resulted in serious and permanent injury. Violence is a way of life for these people whether it is directed towards animals or people
Could fox-hunting be the winning formula for Labour?
No.
46. One of the arts of low politics is understanding and exploiting the passions involved in trivial non-issues.
Happy St Boxing’s Day.
I note that class war is back on again today. Yay!
I do wish those indecisive leftie spoons would make their mind up if they want a class war or not. I’ve already dug the trenches and installed pointy stick-based fortifications.
68 stjohn. Indeed so, he enjoys brain teasers, puzzles, conumdrums and the like.
Easterross and PtP still tied. Will Mike have to draw lots ??
@69:
Sometimes, the course of routine politics, you have to slap a few lefties.
It’s not like they can really feel pain.
72 Yay - a Dance-Off!!!!!!!!!!
69. AIUI, Cameron hasn’t promised to repeal the Hunting Act if the Tories win the election, he’s promised a free vote in the Commons. If that reveals a majority in favour of repealing the legislation, the government would then make available the time to do so (as an aside, it’s a scandal that parliament can’t make its own time available as it so chooses).
For practical purposes, that might amount to much the same thing. I’d be surprised if more than 5% of the Tory parliamentary party voted to keep the ban - Widdy is one anti-hunt Tory standing down this time - and there may be a few from other parties who’d vote to repeal it but the distinction’s worth keeping in mind anyway.
I think it’s great. The Tories and LibDems will be talking about economy and defence, Labour about fox hunting.
Will do them a world of good. No. Really.
9 “The man just doesn’t like Blair’s Middle England voters. And boy oh boy oh boy: those voters know it.”
Stuart - how extraordinarily perceptive of you, as a Scot, 10/10.
56 That is a bold assertion of yours that LibDems in rural areas split perfectly in half on the fox hunting issue . If 70% plus of the whole rural population support the ban , then I would expect that figure to be greater amongst LibDems and fewer amongst Conservatives contrary to your statement .
Richie Rich loves democracy so much, he thinks Labour should pass an enabling act giving itself another year in power.
F***ing c*** Labour sycophant!
61. Tim, do you/have you ever allowed fox hunting on your farm land?
73
As long as those violent hunt supporters have justice meeted out to them such as Otis Ferry received.
Like another poster I am still waiting for David Cameron’s response.
Fox hunting just plays into a bigger “they haven’t really changed” narrative. The picture they want to paint is of Cameron walking into Downing Street the day after polling day and saying, “Forget unemployment and Afghanistan. How do I go about cutting taxes for bankers and bringing back bloodsports?”
I doubt it will work but it isn’t a crazy strategy and Cameron did make a bit of an error suggesting fox hunting was on his agenda. I personally didn’t support the ban but it’s done now and, as it turns out, the foxhounds weren’t all put to death the following day as we were told would happen. Let’s all just move on to all the infinitely more pressing issues.
72 Jack W - It wasn’t like this in your day was it? Proper men don’t believe in ties …….oh hang on a minute!
Can’t find the Matt cartoon on the compromise proposal of fishing with hounds. Don’t know how he does it.
78. Mark S.
1. Aren’t Liberals supposed to defend minorities (in this case it appears to the the Pro Hunters that are in the minority) ?
2. Doesn’t being a Liberal mean that you should allow everyone to do what they want, when they want (within reason, obviously)?
69. David Cameron doesn’t care enough about people born without a silver spoon to even bother commenting on it.
Mind you, it says a lot for the stupidity of the British public to believe a man who played an important role in Black Wednesday is better suited to solving the global economic crisis than Gordon Brown.
I happen to like foxes. In fact I’m fond of all animals, and hate to see more habitat destroyed.
Fox hunting however kills fewer foxes than farmers who hunt them with dogs and guns and poison. The fact is that modern farming has destroyed large parts of the country side and have forces foxes into urban areas where they are thriving.
Labour, as many have said here on PB, will go down fighting dirty and will make a scorched earth of our economy for the Tories and the rest of us.
75 - The point is David that the those fronting up the fox hunting lobby tend to be the equivalent of the Orange Lodgemen fronting up Unionism in the past.
A media disaster even for the agnostic or moderate supporter.
80 - Only in my bedchambers.
Good morning all and I hope you all had an excellent Christmas and are enjoying Bocxing Day and turkey sandwiches!!
66 Tim you alluded to what I see as the main issue about foxhunting and the debate about legalising it or otherwise.
Far more than any class war, I believe it is a symptom of Labour’s general loathing of the rural community as a way of life.
69. Loony bin alert.
86 I do hope you’re getting triple time for your efforts today.
A quick comment on the NN byelection result. I’ve found that a useful index for how well - or more often, how badly - a party has done in a by-election is to multiply the percentage change in absolute vote by the party’s change in the share of the vote and by the percentage change in the share of the vote.
eg. GE - a party wins 12000 out of 40000 votes cast (36%)
By-Election - that party wins 4000 out of 20000 votes cast (20%)
Index = -67% x -16% x -44% = -4.74%.
The lower the number, the worse the result (note - as the scores are nearly always negative, in reality, the further from zero, the worse the result. Also note that it doesn’t really work if exactly one or two of the changes are positive, though it does for Glenrothes where all three were positive).
Norwich North had the worst index score for Labour in any byelection since they took power, excluding Haltemprice & Howden, where they didn’t stand. In fact, it was the worst for any government since Dudley West in December 1994.
If fox hunting did drag a few extra voters to the polls, it can surely have had only a minimal positive effect as overall the result was disastrous. In net terms, it may well have had a negative impact.
74 MM. “A Danceoff” - A fine kilted Easterross has one substantial advantage over young PtP - A magnificent array of Scottish dangly bits and bobs - lady voters swoon and pull Easterross’s lever and we have a winner !!
86. Richie Rich, why do you use the name of the person who betrayed Thomas More, and made a fortune out of selling him out to King Henry VIII?
Is it something in your character?
75
If this issue ever came to a free vote the voting figures would be interesting, given David Cameron’s connections with the Heythrop Hunt.
Roderick Fleming, also a Heythrop backer, is based at Mr Cameron’s Chipping Norton HQ. He and the owner of Heythrop Park, the hunt’s historic home, have made sizeable political donations to the Tories.
88 You mean like those terrible Tories Kate Hoey, Chair of the Alliance and the CA President Ann Mallalieu?
..oh wait
89 - The Thatcher Govts sell off of rural council housing without replacing it did more to damage the rural economy than anything by any govt before or since.
Concentrating on fox hunting allows the “Countryside lobby” to ignore that fact.
89. I live in the heart of rural England (I’m looking out over miles if fields right now) and I KNOW that Labour loathes me! Then again thats OK because I loath them as well!
That said, fox hunting is still something I couldn’t care less about. I’ve been held up by hunters and followers when I’ve been trying to drive along country roads, and thats a nuisance I could do without.
On the other hand, I think everyone should be able to do what they want, when they want. If getting dressed up like a load of numptys and galloping across vast areas of rural UK with packs of dogs in tow is what turns them on on a Saturday afternoon, good for them. Live and let live I say.
95 And here was me thinking he was a character from Happy Days
Someone’s just voted to break the deadlock!
99 Those numpties as you describe them can and still do gallop across the countryside with packs of hounds . The only thing that is now illegal is for them to pursue and kill foxes .
100 Plato. Tease …. is it tartan gussett or French fish nets ??
67 - I wouldn’t go out of my way to socialise with hunters. Or to vote on the hunting issue.
I’ve never really made my mind up about hunting, which means I’d probably not have been in favour of banning it at the time, and more than likely not that fussed about legalising it now. It’s a “meh” kind of issue.
However, the proud class bigotry cannot help tilting me in favour of it. Just.
95 - Ask yourself this.
Would Dave see it as a vote winner if a photograph of him hunting were to reach a newspaper, if the Tories on here are to be believed then he it would.
I’d guess it wouldn’t.
61-Wibblers link at 18 exhibits the unpleasant, arrogant, pre fatherhood, pro section 28 stage in Camerons life which ‘m sure all voters hope has been truly left behind.
Not all voters! Or if we dare disagree with the creed of NuLabour we should be disenfranchised?
100. Richard Rich, 1st Baron Rich (1496/7 – 12 June 1567) also known as Ritchie Rich died a very rich man.
Is our Ritchie a decendant?
A labour supporting friend of mine said when the original legislation came in, ‘I don’t like fox hunting, but then again I don’t like Manchester United either but I wouldn’t ban them’.
OT Apology of the Season - no hard feelings I’m sure.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-1238092/Dragons-Den-Producer-Martyn-Smith.html
In 1997 Labour won many genuinely rural seats or seats containing county towns for very rural communities which hitherto had been considered rock solid Tory or always gave that impression.
Seats like Worcester (wasn’t he the man who introduced the hunting bill) and Gloucester in England and like Stirling and Dumfries in Scotland went Labour. Dumfries had shortly before returned Sir Hector Munro with a 9000 Tory majority and was the second safest Tory seat in Scotland after Jim Murphy’s Eastwood.
During 13 years of Labour we in the rural community have seen:
thousands of village post offices close
thousands of village shops close
thousands of village pubs close
a reduction in the provision of rural bus services (some of which were operated by the Royal Mail)
the imposition of large “colourless” housing developments
the young folks forced to leave through inability to buy or rent houses in the communities their families have lived in for generations.
inceasing demand for food production while Government inspired agencies have heaped regulation after regulation on the way we live and work.
Many of these changes are not the fault of the Government directly and not all of them are bad or were unavoidable but it is the government which gets the blame as it is the only instution which can prevent/undo such changes.
Foxhunting is just another such way of life for many thousands of country people who feel urban politicians treat them like living museum exhibits, to be visited at the weekend when city dwellers want to escape the steel, glass and concrete which is most of our urban landscape today.
6 Richie Rich
Not so. I have friends in rural Carmarthenshire. The local hunt was made up of local farmers (not rich landowners, but working hill farmers) who maintained a pack of hounds. Every now and again they would follow the pack in landrovers and on quadbikes, and when they cornered a fox, shoot it. A good way of controlling vermin and a good day out.
In addition, plenty of country people, even if they don’t hunt or follow the hunt, think that the ban is an example of yet another attack on their way of life. Even if you think that hunters are a bunch of filthy rich t0ssers, that is no reason to ban them. Just ignore them.
And as you think it is “vile”, presumably you are against the control of vermin full stop?
As I understand it, the ban on hunting deer with dogs has caused problems with overstocking in the south, as we generally do not have the big open spaces required for rifle stalking. It seems to me that you should have reasonable carte blanche to hunt either vermin or prey animals.
15 James Kelly. The difference is that the act banning hunting is a complicated thing with lots of different clauses and stuff defining what is and isn’t allowed, the penalties, etc. All the Tories need to pass is a one-liner repealing it.
Good morning all.
Sickeningly, I am working again today but covering the Boxing Day sport so perhaps more fun than the news shift last night.
A great day of sport for betting opportunities with the King George, lots of football and the cricket.
England have had a decent morning but could do with getting rid of the Kallis/Smith partnership ASAP.
On topic - I can’t get excited about the hunting issue but I can’t believe that IHT and foxy woxy is a winning strategy for Mr No More Boom and Bust…
It just proves that the Government is totally out of steam. Time to go, chaps.
Let us remember that it is fox hunting in England and Wales that would be subject to a free vote. This message has no relevance in Scotland.
106 - Tim, have you actually READ the comments from the Tories on here? Most of us seem to be very ambivalent with regard to hunting.
111 - thousands of village post offices close
thousands of village shops close
thousands of village pubs close
a reduction in the provision of rural bus services (some of which were operated by the Royal Mail)
the young folks forced to leave through inability to buy or rent houses in the communities their families have lived in for generations.
All the inevitable result of the Conservative sell off of rural council housing and young people having to move away and find accommodation.
Fox hunting remains legal in Northern Ireland.
86 No, it says a lot about Gordon Brown (not that Cameron did play any role in Black Wednesday).
On topic, I think it will motivate small groups of supporters, on either side, without making any difference to the overall result.
Nor am I convinced that many people are bothered by “they haven’t changed” argument. The people who believe that aren’t going to vote Conservative in any event.
114. How would go about “properly banning” fox hunting? Where are the numbers of police going to come from to monitor every single hunt and the miles they cover? Do you not think the police have more important things to do like, oh I don’t know, stopping granny from being mugged and beaten up when she goes to get her pension?
“not that Cameron did play any role in Black Wednesday”
Come on Sean - Cameron is a man who has no experience and has never done anything in his life, but nonetheless was running the economy of a major country in his early 20s………..
117 It was the tenants who bought the houses. Had they not done so, they’d still be living in them.
Newcomers can do a lot to revitalise a village, and keep many of the local shops , pubs and clubs going.
120 One could probably bring it to a complete halt in the Home Counties, but in rural Devon, Cornwall, Wales, or the Lake District, completely impossible.
61 If the Tories are thinking of setting up a hunting quango, then I personally would prefer the status quo.
They should have the balls to simply repeal the Hunting Act and put nothing in its place.
A quango would just show that Cameron’s Tories are just as much in favour of a sanitised, government-controlled, regulated way of life as Brown’s Labour Party.
Government should be withdrawing from whole areas of human endeavour, not encroaching on more of them.
And - this sort of regulation is inimical to the traditional English way of doing things. We don’t say you can do X as long as you are willing to be told how to do it by a Government official. We tell you what the rules are and let you get on with it. As long as you don’t break the law, we don’t bother you.
Morning all,
An estimated 400,000 people up and down the country are expected to turn out today to support the Boxing Day hunt, as Easterrross points out @89, the fox hunting ban was generally perceived as an attack on the rural community itself and epitomised Labour’s failure to comprehend communities outside of the urban centres.
I’ll say it again, 400,000 people; if Labour wish to remind them how much Labour loathes them, then fill your boots, I’m sure it’s a vote winner.
78 Err I was referring to Lib Dem MPs. Please reread to see that what what I mean’t.
I also wondered about the idea of any PBer calling himself “Richie Rich”. On 22nd June 1535 my ancestor Cardinal John Fisher Bishop of Rochester was beheaded as was his closest friend a few days later, Sir Thomas More. They sahre 22nd June as their “Saints’ Day”. One of those who gave false evidence against them both was Sir Richard Rich, later 1st Baron, Secretary for Wales.
126 400,000 wow that means that some 60,000,000 plus will not turn out to show their lack of support for the Boxing Day Hunt .
129
Now then, are you arguing that 59 million people were in favour of the Iraq War as only 1 million people turned out to protest?
114 Flower: “Never understood hunting really.Why get a thrill out of killing a wild animal?”
So, you want to ban something because you don’t understand it?
Following that argument, I should want to ban homosexuality, football and lager.
“Countryside Alliance Protest in London was a selfish sham bellow from people who wanted to save hunting.Other innocents were duped into thinking it was about saving the countryside.”
But the way you protect the countryside is to protect traditional rural activities. The English countryside is largely man-made, a result of hundreds of years of farming and associated activities.
By the way, you hunt deer because you eat them. They are prey.
121 I am not arguing anything , just pointing out that post 126 was meaningless .
128 Easterross. Yes these types seem to be particularly nasty in their attitude.
124 Have to agree with Easterross - rural post offices in my neck of the woods have closed because most of the services they offered have been moved online by HMG and they’ve had little room to improve their lot.
We have one that now resides in the local Coop and that’s it.
And re colourless housing estates - again have to agree with Easterross - Pelham Homes have attempted to built 2.5k box homes on farm land here despite there being no suitable infrastructure/jobs to support the new residents.
124 Accountant, clearly you didnt actually read my original post.
As it happens more village post offices have now closed under Labour than under the previous conservative governments. However the main reason thousands of village post offices have closed in the past decade is that the Government has removed most of the remunerated services they offered.
Pensioners used to be able to walk to the post office with a pension book and cash their pensions. The Government “encouraged” millions to have their pensions paid directly into bank accounts and post offices no longer get paid for cashing pensions. My local post mistress has been trying to sell up for 5 years but cannot because in comparison to the number of hours she works she doesnt even get the minimum wage. People no longer go to the post office to buy stamps, road tax etc which can either be done anywhere or on line.
It is fine for those of you who only have to go a few hundred yards to the nearest post office when one closes but when a rural post office closes, the nearest may be more than 10 miles away. I am lucky I have 3 each 4 miles away as is the nearest bus.
136 Presumably , you think the Conservatives should increase the PSBR in order to keep/reopen all these uneconomic rural post offices .
Fox hunting?
for fox sake I think we have bigger issues as a nation.
60 ‘This shady group started out as the British Field Sports Society…’
Shady? The Countryside Alliance couldn’t be more open about their existence and aims. Same goes for tim’s comment at 66; the organisation is fairly vociferous in it’s campaigning to keep rural businesses going, and communities alive with housing and pubs for local people.
As I posted in response to Ritchie Rich earlier, spreading untruths with regard to the ban on hunting with dogs is a short sighted tactic, and does the ‘Anti’ side of the argument no favour whatsoever.
3 - “This is pretty desperate stuff for the Labour Party. After nearly 13 years of Labour government, is this really the very best that they can come up with? The Blairite project to appeal to The Centre is now officially dead. Therefore, Labour are going to be out of government for a very, very long time indeed.”
well said Stuart.
In a way its sad that Labour have been reduced to this.
136 - So pensiioners should be forced to travel to pick up their pension?
Next you’ll be telling me that Tescos should be banned from delivering in rural areas, which of course probably has more of an effect.
But of course we all know that post Thatchers sell off young people have had to leave to find housing and once that happens no amount of whinging about lack of critical mass to keep shops and pubs open is relevant.
Here is asummary of known MP’s positions on fox hunting based on their party political affiliations:
http://www.supportfoxhunting.co.uk/party_views.shtml
Personally I support Lembit’s views on this issue.
139 and the spreading of lies/untruths by the Coubtryside Alliance about the number of jobs that would be lost if there were a ban did their side of the argument no favours either .
129-And how many saboteurs will be out? Still reckon 60m don’t care enough either way.
100-200,000 came out against Iraq war, guess 58.8m+ were for it then.
How many will turn up to Boxing Day matches? Guess 58m don’t care either.
Why do pensioners need to cash their pensions at a post office? They’re as capable of opening a bank account as you or I.
144 – Yes, it was a ridiculous comment by Mark Senior, in his world only if 30 million people take to the streets should something be considered as ‘important’
As a Tory PPC who has already come out against repealing the ban I think the issue is a vote defining issue for very many non-political voters. Lots of people listen to anti tory propaganda and I am afraid the story put about that the Tories are ‘bringing back’ foxhunting does send a message to those people that is unhelpful.
My opponent is a LD and is featuring fox hunting on his leaflets big-style.
146 No the ridiculous comment was yours in the first place . The vast majority of people who live in rural communities are against repealing the ban . Those like yourself who are pro hunting are flat earthers .
Has Mike had his cornflakes yet?
141/145 Pensioners have been forced to travel because of Labour closing post offices and forcing them to have their pensions paid into a bank account.
What good is having your pension paid intoa bank account if you do not shop online, do not have a bank close by and dont have a car to drive to the nearest supermarket. In addition Tescos only deliver groceries 40 miles and it costs I believe £6 to buy them online.
So pensioners who dont have computers, who live alone, dont have cars and have seen their local post office/village shop close should just be left to rot according to you lefties! There are hundreds of thousands of pensioners and indeed younger people who fit into this category.
Clearly we country people should be punished for daring to live in the rural communities without which you urban lefties would be unable to shop at Waitrose because we grow the stuff which gets put in the nice pretty white containers you put in your shopping trolleys.
150 So what increase in the PSBR would you like to see to allow uneconomic post offices and shops remain open in rural areas .
147. Isn’t it funny how the so called Liberal Demorcrats pick and choose what they are “liberal” about?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the Lib-Dems are the big hypocrites of British politics. At least with Labour and the Tories you know where you stand, unlike often the UNliberal, Liberals.
148 Mark what utter crap. The vast majority of people in rural communites have no view either way. theya re more worried about having a bus service or affordable petrol or indeed still having a job come the GE.
A Christmas gift for Labour I think.
152 and isn’t it funny how you Conservatives support the majority of public opinion except when you they don’t want something you support .
151 Why incease the PSBR. there are billions being squandered every day by your friend Gordon Brown. We could get rid of most of Whitehall and no-one would notice.
It’s surprising that Shadsy never offered a market for POTY, I wonder whether Ladbrokes will now offer odds for the final vote?
150 I’m not a leftie.
But before I get old and doddery I will make sure that I live in a town, maybe only a small one, which will have local services and public transport links. Really, it is in your own hands. What we should be asking is why people without transport links are being left, isolated, to live in small rural communities.
In any case, if you live somewhere Tesco won’t deliver, I expect there will be a local shop.
153 Conservative rubbishes opinion poll which does not support his preconceived view - what a surprise .
I live in a rural community.
No-one gives a stuff about fox hunting.
Most people are turned off politics and think politicans are thieving bar stewards.
Hunting does not get a mention..
148 - Mark. ‘Flat earthers’ deny something scientifically provable. What you mean is that they are in the minority and what you imply is that they are fighting a losing battle for an outdated worldview against ‘progress’ and reason.
It’s a curious argument for a Lib Dem to put that being in a minority on what is for many of those most exercised by hunting a social issue, is equivalent to benighted pseudo-science. After all, what proportion of the electorate didn’t support the Lib Dems at the last election - or indeed, doesn’t do so now? Probably a good deal more than is in favour of the ban, especially in rural areas.
Gordon Brown promised to make the difficult decisions - his pitch was that he might not be attractive but he would Do The Right Thing.
That’s all out of the window. Banning hunting was on anything except the basest political level the wrong thing. It wasted a huge amount of legislative time. It was ignorant townies attacking ordinary country people (not toffs - only someone who has never lived in the deep country could think hunting of all sorts - foxes, rabbits, hares, rats, etc etc is anything but the oldest ordinary sport of all). It was utterly pointless because the law is impossible to enforce. It was counterproductive because foxes are pests and will be killed come what may, and non hunting methods are more cruel than hunting.
But the hunting ban was and is popular. That is a political fact. The only point of banning hunting was to rally people who know nothing of hunting against people they don’t understand. And, yes, it probably does work. People do love to condemn people who are not like themselves. That’s why we have racism, homophobia etc.
I say this as a City boy born and bred who has never hunted anything at all and never wants to.
155 And so the pointless class war goes on. Meanwhile, the government continues to turn a blind eye to the cruelties of Halal and Kosher butchery. If they were really concerned with animal welfare those practices would have been outlawed in the UK years ago.
155. I don’t support anything fox hunting or its banning. Couldn’t care less. I just think its funny how “Liberals” are often in favour of denying people referendums and banning things that minorities enjoy doing. To my mind if your calling yourself liberal then you should be liberal, even when it comes to things you personally don’t care for.
159 See 133. I was referring to the Lib Dem parliamentary party only. That did split almost in half on the bill IIRC as it was a free vote matter.
155 Nope, I support things I agree with, whether there is demonstrable public opinion in favour or not. But I am not sure what part of “liberalism” is against allowing people to hunt with dogs but, presumably, still allows foxes to be shot and poisoned.
164 I have no wish to stop the minority of people who ride about the countryside with a pack of hounds , they can and still do so . I don’t see any benefits in allowing them to kill foxes in doing so . How is that view illiberal ?
162 There are policies that are popular, at one level, but which still do nothing to rally support for the government or party which advocates them, because they’re just not important enough to most people - the ban on foxhunting was one such policy.
And there is the risk that policies of this type can actually undermine support for their advocates, as they can appear weird and obsessive to most voters.
167, presumably you’re against farmers killing foxes, or councils hiring peregrine falcons to kill off pigeons?
Taking Mark Seniors example about majority public support for banning fox hunting being a reason to ban hunting, does that also mean Mark thinks hanging should be brought back and 90 days detention without charge should be implemented? What a funny “liberal”
167 Because foxes need to be killed, they are vermin and kill ducks and chickens.
So why shouldn’t the people riding round the countryside with packs of hounds be allowed to kill foxes while they do so?
165 I think the vote was 26 to 18 voting in favour of the ban . If you want to interpret that as almost 50/50 fair enough .
Fair’s fair. We should also allow horse hunts, dog hunt, and fox hunter hunts.
I seem to remember an Anthony Burgess book wherein artificial wars and industrialized canibalism were used to control human population.
172. In parliamentary terms, that is near enough to fifty-fifty when usually a party will vote a hundred to nil on a vote, and a ninety-ten division is regarded as a significant split.
171. Hunting is of course a highly inefficient way of killing foxes and IIRC the number killed has in any case gone up since the ban was introduced. The arguments for hunting are varied but its effeciveness in controlling foxes is one of the lesser ones.
150 - Its strange to see a Thatcherite argue that subsidies to rural areas should be higher, given that food subsidies to farmers in rural areas are the biggest wealth transferrance through price rigging that exists.
I realise you don’t want to take the blame for Margarets village-killing housing policy, but it’s something you have to live with I’m afraid.
Charlie Whelan is a great fan of shooting animals for sport; has he made any tweets on the topic of fox hunting today?
174. Indeed. I’ve never brought this idea that foxes need to be controlled. I mean, they do need controlling, but hutning can’t be a very good way of doing it. I always thought a lot of times the fox actually get’s away?
Another surious arguement is this idea that because foxes hunt and kill they are are fair game to be hunted and killed. I mean, aren’t Humans supposed to be more enlightend than a fox?
175 I thought that in general, rural populations were rising, not falling. It seems unlikely that there are many villages dying off due to a shortage of people.
177 Poisoning, trapping, and shooting are far more efficient, although I see no moral distinction between these methods, and hunting with dogs.
Well it looks like Labour have got the Mark Senior vote - so 1931 here we come
174 My argument was more if (a) it’s OK to ride round the countryside with packs of hounds and (b) it’s OK to kill foxes, then it should be OK to do (a) and (b) together. If it’s not really a very good way of doing it, that’s not really very relevant.
The reasons for banning is seem to be (a) all those people in pink coats are toffs (b) I’m a townie and don’t understand all this messy, untidy country stuff and (c) I don’t like your state of mind while you’re doing it.
The reason for allowing it is, it’s a free country and, although I don’t like what you do, we should allow you to do it.
“So what increase in the PSBR would you like to see to allow uneconomic post offices and shops remain open in rural areas .”
I expect Easterross thinks that that rural areas should have higher spending relative to other areas. There’s no doubt that Labour has concentrated apending on areas that vote Labour compared to those areas that don’t.
“isn’t it funny how you Conservatives support the majority of public opinion except when you they don’t want something you support .”
I don’t want to go foxhunting but don’t think it should be banned. Nor do I want to engage in homosexual activity but I don’t think that should be banned either.
Do you support the banning of Halal butchery Mark?
On the wider issue playing class war games will only backfire on Labour. To the urban Guardian reading Labour member hating farmers might seem natural but to your average disgruntled former Labour voter the ‘class enemies’ are the ’single mothers and immigrants’ at one end of the social spectrum and the new toffs of ‘quangocrats and hospital managers’ at the other.
179, other methods have problems too. Poison’s not a lovely way to die, likewise trapping. Shooting can lead to an injured animal dying slowly.
Lamping’s the worst. A couple of kids in the last few years got killed because of lamping. [Lamping is when you've got a car with a big light, you suddenly shine it on a fox and it freezes, then you shoot it from close range].
173:
Oh, and I also seem to remember reading that the Spartans used to hunt the Helots. Nice people.
Morning all
Fox hunting is one of those issues I don’t get very excited about. I think the propaganda from both sides has done nothing to move the debate forward and, as we see on here this morning, the emotion of it all just gets in the way every time.
As someone who enjoys horse racing, I no more approve of the Countryside Alliance being allowed to use the racecourse to make its political points than I would an Anti-Hunting group doing the same.
The current law seems as unenforceable as the ban on people using mobiles while driving so there is room for improvement. To be honest, I wonder if we ought not to separate the issue of the controlling of vermin from the issue of people seemingly riding round the countryside enjoying themselves. As long as the latter respect the views of any landowners not wanting them on their land, I don’t see the problem.
There is a much bigger and more serious issue about the future of rural communities but that gets lost in the smoke and mirrors of the foxhunting debate.
180 Nope , the Libdems will have the Mark Senior vote which as I did not vote in 2005 will be 1 off the Conservative majority here in Worthing .
181.
“The reason for allowing it is, it’s a free country and, although I don’t like what you do, we should allow you to do it.”
Freedom! Thats the best arguement the hunting supporters have.
177 GIN, I would second Sean Fear’s response at 179. And at to your second point
aren’t Humans supposed to be more enlightend than a fox?
No, while we eat meat we are still carnivores and hunt either for prey or to protect our territories. I had a lovely pheasant on Christmas Day (actually I slightly overcooked it but that was my fault), somebody shot it. You just can’t get away from our essentially animal nature, I’m afraid.
62. StJohn, good luck but I would counter with Deep Purple, either 14-1 straight or6-1 without Kauto Star. good each way bet.
188. I guess thats true. Does Mark Senior eat meat I wonder? Would Mark make everyone eat cous cous instead of Turkey, for their Christmas lunch?
Yes i eat meat but not FOX meat LOL
190. It’s disturbing to think about what a world with Mark Senior as dictator would be like. It certainly wouldn’t be in any way a ‘liberal’ society.
185 Whilst I’m not someone who would ever go hunting, I find the class-war stuff particularly repellent on this subject.
Once again, it’s the urban left judging another group as morally inferior/cruel/somehow a lesser human for living a life they don’t understand and therefore must be wrong.
I notice that Halal butchery isn’t illegal, and for anyone who hasn’t been near an abbatoir or chicken processing plant, it’s not something I’d recommend.
It’s not about animal cruelty, it’s about using ‘cuddly’ animals to further their agenda.
Just like polar bears.
Right folks I am off to rip up the carcass of yesterday’s turkey in order to retrieve the edible meat, turn the stock into soup (together with the left over brussel sprouts and vegetables) and burn the bones in the aga to heat the house.
Tim I believe that as the world heads towards a major food crisis, the Government (of any political hue) should be supporting the more fragile rural communities, the ones who dont have banks, public transport and shops and Tescos home deliveries let alone post office/village shops because we are the ones who continue to farm the sheep, grow the barley, plant and husband the upland forests and ensure the mountain and hillside rivers continue to flow fresh water. We are also home to the hydro electric schemes and upland wind farms which provide a disproportionately large quantity of the country’s power even though we get charged more for ours.
172 I said IIRC. Your tone is surprising to say the least.
“I realise you don’t want to take the blame for Margarets village-killing housing policy, but it’s something you have to live with I’m afraid.”
Would that be the Margaret who left office over 19 years ago?
I take it your referring to council house sales again tim?
Not too keen on the lower orders owning property are you. After all when people own property they become less dependent on the state and that’s one concept Labour can’t abide. The working class controlled by the state and the middle class enslaved to the banks is Labour’s dream.
Where the Conservatives went wrong was not in encouraging council house sales but in not building more. Not in the dredful sink estates beloved of Labour but in small numbers scattered around more affluent areas.
Tell me though how many council houses have been built since 1997?
Another Labour failure.
71. David Herdson - “One of the arts of low politics is understanding and exploiting the passions involved in trivial non-issues.”
Indeed!
The Scottish Labour Party is forever going on about Scots not being able to watch Coronation Street if Scotland became independent. Gordon Brown learnt his trade in the organisation where “low politics” is the modus operandi.
192 To be fair to Mark, I think that almost any one of us who was given untrammelled power, without any kind of check or balance, would abuse it.
191 Chicken? Duck? Lamb? Goose? Guinea fowl? Eggs? Prefer free range to factory farmed?
191. Morally is there a differance between killing a cow to eat and killing a fix for fun?
Is the Tories position to legalise Hare Coursing as well?
If so they can say bye bye to Southport as a target seat.
193 - I’d have no objection to increasing the PSBR to build rural housing as an investment where it is needed to counteract the assualt on rural housing of the 80’s.
fix = fox
167
‘I don’t see any benefits in allowing them to kill foxes in doing so . How is that view illiberal ?’
Do you hold the same view about allowing people to stand by a river and rip a fish’s mouth to pieces ?
196 - I supported the council house sales policy.
On the proviso that they were replaced when sold.
The damage done to villages has not stopped 19 years later its actually getting worse.
Been a fun debate this morning guys. Off out for a Boxing Day lunch with the family. Have fun!
I have never before witnessed so many people following my local hound exercising club as there are today, and there isn’t a toff amongst them. There have been two ‘accidents’ this morning, and everybody seems rather pleased about this.
191 I’d be quite happy to eat fox if it was safe to do so - and badgers too.
Don’t see a distinction myself - if it was a choice between something that had had a free-range life or one brought up in a shed - that’s the question that would concern me a great deal more.
“In fact, Labour might make the threat to the wellbeing of foxes more of an election issue than it does inheritance tax, since polls have suggested that Tory plans for the latter were not as unpopular as Labour strategists thought.”
Most of us could have told Labour that, already.
201 I hope they at least legalise the hunting of hares with dogs. I’m partial to hare and after the ban came in they disappeared off the market, and only seem to have come back recently.
There is a danger that farmers will be encouraged to grub up the wooded and scrubby areas that gave cover to wild animals, in the past the fox could be flushed with hounds, now you need wide open spaces so you can see them & shoot them.
norman normal I wonder if they are the same two innocent anti-hunt protestors who tried to stick darts in the horses eyes?
207 Plato, you are supposed to be able to eat badger ham (although I googled it, and the references I could find to eating badger said it was quite disgusting).
Now squirrels are a different matter, I believe, I have been searching for a source of squirrel for a while, without success.
197-The Scottish Labour Party is forever going on about Scots not being able to watch Coronation Street if Scotland became independent.
How pathetic of Labour!
All over the CIS I see people watching Russian Channel 1, say BBC 1, by satellite, cable, and normal transmission (and other channels, say ITVs. C4, BBC 2, etc). They even have versions tailored to time zones (local and Moscow) and for country (you see it in the ads). Maybe this will be a technological feat too far in the UK. Though I notice in ROI people had no problem watching/receiving British TV (in fact no pub seemed to have RTE on!). Still, maybe Labour in thir infinite spite will spike TV signals in Scotland.
211 A country restaurant a few miles from me served squirrel for a while but some people made a fuss and they stopped - they still serve rabbits which perversely seem cuter to me and are household pets too - very puzzling thinking.
“I supported the council house sales policy.
On the proviso that they were replaced when sold.
The damage done to villages has not stopped 19 years later its actually getting worse.”
I totally agree with you here tim.
The only defence that I can give for not allowing the receipts from council house sales to be used in building more houses was that by 1980 council housing had become associated with sink estates and tower blocks.
The council houses that were built in affluent areas always seemed to be rather successful in increasing social mobility and social cohesiveness.
If Cameron wants a ‘Clause 4′ image he shoule make this Conservative policy.
I feel a “what wine to put with squirrel/badger/cat” post coming on.
211. Elvis Presley used to eat squirrels.
209. Hares disappear quickest from rough shooting. Unlike rabbits, hares run in straight lines and are very easy to shoot. The good thing is that they are heavy to carry so that acts as an incentive to let them run away. One problem is when farmers, who are not interested in shooting and game-keeping themselves, allow their townie friends to shoot over their land. They tend to blaze away at the hares, as they are the easiest thing to shoot, and the populations crash.
The other problem is buzzards. Once rare, as they were always shot by game-keepers, they are protected now, and their number have increased so greatly that they take out the young hares, and most everything else.
The RSPCA tend to like to protect large species (like badgers and buzzards) as they are seen by people from the town, who then imagine that a good job is being done. The problem is that these species then predominate and there are various negative outcomes, such as TB in badgers is endemic, and it spreads to cattle, costing billions.
I like Bonzo’s idea that animal preservation and culling policies should be set locally, not by central government, to please an electorate who rarely experience the countryside, and cannot possibly know the effects of the various policies.
215 tim
http://blog.al.com/outdoors/2007/10/the_humpday_diner_what_wine_go.html
“The Humpday Diner: What wine goes best wtih squirrel?”
Speaking of badgers - I Googled ‘eating badgers’ and got this
…”UK military spokesman Major Mike Shearer said: “We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area…”
Not quite what I was expecting!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6295138.stm
A badger stew recipe - the comments are rather fun, this made me wonder…
“Interesting recipe sounds good. Badger is quite gamey somewhere between venison and beef it lends its self well to being curried. although it does worry me that the dog refused to eat the raw meat when i dropped some on the kitchen floor,he isn’t usually that fussy and includes far more disgusting thing in his list of dietry supplements.”
http://www.gastronomydomine.com/2006/06/badger-stew.html
The POTY Ballot
When I checked at 9.50 the top three were
Richard Nanbavi
David Herdson
Yellow Submarine
and on equal votes -
Easterross
Peter the Punter.
So all five are going into the final FPTP run off.
Voting will start later today.
219 It seems a nit impractical to me. For a start the first two ingredients are…
1 badger
1 glass of pig’s blood…
So as well as having already caught (and hung) your badger, you have to have a freshly slaughtered pig to hand, and the time to cook blairau au sang at just the time when you ought to be making sausages, bacon, ham, salami, black pudding, pate, rillettes, pork scratchings, brawn etc etc.
221 And a fast flowing river to wash the grease off it for 48hrs…
Still, a gastronome will no doubt endeavour for his art!
I see mark senior having a go at the conservative supporters on PB on fox hunting.
The lib dems policy(I think,who knows
)on fox hunting support a hunting ban,well mark me old son,you better tell a fair number of the lib dems MP’s who support the liberty to hunt.
The Liberal Democrats
In the House of Commons
The majority of Liberal Democrat MPs in the House of Commons support a hunting ban - however a significant number support ‘the liberty to hunt’. 26 voted for a hunting ban and 18 voted against.
The general Lib Dem party policy is a total ban on hunting with dogs.
The voting of several Lib Dem MPs to ban hunting - including former leader Charles Kennedy - whose constituencies are in Scotland, caused fury. As hunting is banned in Scotland, the Hunting Bill would have no effect in the country.
The parliamentary middle-way group - who campaign for hunting to be licensed not simply banned - is chaired by Lib Dem MP Lembit Öpik, he is also a member of the Hunting Bill standing committee.
In the House of Lords
The majority of Lib Dems in the House of Lords either vote against a hunting ban or abstain.
I’d agree that fox hunting as an issue won’t win any votes in metropolitan marginals. Because most people are idiots on the issue. But repealing the ban should be folded into the policy on localism that Cameron is espousing.
If every time Labour bring it up, Tories respond by talking about the economy, Afghanistan, unemployment or education, it should be irrelevant. Engaging on the issue would be a mistake during the campaign.
POTY - It looks like PtP has been edged out of the final vote.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
224 The “localism” argument is a fairly strong one, IMO. The only difficulty is deciding what level of local government to delegate to. However it would support my own preferred model of devolution to England, which would be to have a federal system where most issues are devolved to small local areas (perhaps county-sized, but with local people having the right to decide who governs them, not central government) and a light-touch English government where Parliament may only need to meet a few days a year and which is concerned only with inescapable “national” issues such as national rail policy.
I’m certainly going to vote Labour because of the fox hunting issue *. As long as Hilary Benn and Gordo are there to protect cuddly icklee animals from toff meanies, why would I care that this government has run up a debt of about a trillion pounds, failed entirely to keep any of its promises and proved itself to be entirely odious, incompetent, deceitful and fascistic?
Seriously, though, the success of the ‘Back the Ban’ campaign is going to be some sort of indication of just why democracy is merely the least awful form of government.
* - Just kidding. I’d sooner firebomb a tiny tots’ nursery than vote Labour.
FPT
Re: HMQ’s Speech - congrats to Wibbler for spotting “Afghanistan” as PP’s winning word.
Tim is right however, these long, long word lists, also sometimes offered by Ladbrokes, are just dreadful betting propositions and one of my New Year’s resolutions is to avoid them like the plague.
Foxhunting. Surely the issue has now fundamentally changed since before the ban. Back then it was about the risks of banning hunting, and the effect it would have on rural communities - fears which have largely proved unfounded.
The argument now is whether or not to bring back a minor detail of a sport that the vast majority have got used to living without, - a detail that a majority of people feel -if asked- to be a bit unnecessarily cruel.
At the moment I cannot see how this will win popular public support, especially when it stirs up the aggressive pro and anti protesters with their demonstrations and anger all at a time when there is so much more we could and should be dealing with as a country.
To many people it will seem like parliament is once again obsessing about minor issues affecting a very few people while the majority public have to cope with a major recession, war, terrorism and a host of other problems affecting their daily lives.
I am told that the repeal is likely to be a small ‘free vote’ clause wrapped up in a much wider Government bill on freedom and liberty, looking to modify and adjust some unintended consequences of Labour legislation, including some of the other bans, and abolishing ID cards.
Perhaps this will work; lets hope so.
There is another way to look at the countryside or wilderness, if any. It seems to me to be universally adopted on the whole by many tribes and cultures. It is this: You respect the wild and fit into it. You travel, particularly when hunting, quietly with due knowledge of wind, sound, and smell. You blend in. You respect your prey, and use it fully.
In our culture we jump to the other extreme. We ride large smelly beasts and follow baying hounds. We blow horns, shout, and generally muck about, ruffling up and sometimes even vandalising the countryside.
When walking we tramp clicking our trendy walking poles, and converse.
What do we miss in these practices? Almost everything. Ah well, whatever turns you on.
Fox hunting? Labour are pathetic.
It is a typical emotion issue. Labour have survived by bringing politics down to a base level of emotion, name calling and inuendo.
This is why Cameron has elected for Leader debates. People will be able to see issues discussed rationally. Views can be challenged without being shouted down. It will be much harder for media outlets to whip up hysteria.
The problem with British politics is the influence of a few media outlets directing the mob with emotion.
Labour haven’t understood the change in how political debates will be carried out.
This is Labour’s last gasp.
GORDON Brown’s roadshows about “Britishness” are such a flop that the Government is PAYING people to turn up, it can be revealed.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2784885/Gordon-Browns-roadshow-rent-a-crowd.html
FFS,call a GE,PLEASE
The biggest threat to hunting in the Home Counties is the growth of golf courses, even more than housing developments. Locally, we lost the Garth and South Berks hunt which had to amalgamate with the Aylesbury Hunt and does most of its hunting now in Bucks. The building of new golf courses was the reason. New housing estates tend to extend existing villages or towns. Golf courses go deep into the countryside and the last thing golfers want is horses riding over the greens.
The current ban is unworkable. My advice if you want to stop fox hunting is to take up golf.
Sorry to go O/T
Why is my question to this article ?
Courtesy Daily Telegraph
The former Prime Minister is understood to be the most expensive person in the country for the police to guard because of his regular foreign excursions.
More than 20 officers are now understood to be assigned to protecting Mr Blair at a cost of more than £115,000 a week.
Whitehall insiders are becoming increasingly concerned over the security costs as Mr Blair travels the world on lucrative private sector work.
It is feared that Mr Blair’s security will become even more costly next year following his appearance before the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war which could make him more of a terrorist target.
Mr Blair is typically abroad most weeks and the average bill for his close protection team of bodyguards is more than £16,000 a day, according to Whitehall sources. The protection bill is three times higher than previous public estimates.
The argument about foxhunting boils down to this for me , as I suspect it does for David Cameron. Which would you rather your local copper investigated of a Saturday, a violent crime or reports of an illegal fox hunt? Its a no-brainer surely. I don’t really like fox hunters or fox hunting, but I think it’s a moral issue not a legal one. Let the police go after the real crims who are making ordinary people’s lives a misery. It’s up to those strongly against hunting to persuade those strongly in favour that they are wrong.
105. “Post 21 James Kelly.I would really like to read the article about Cameron that you refer to. The article which reveals his nasty nature.Where can I get hold of it?”
Always happy to oblige, ASB -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/mar/22/davidcameron.politicalcolumnists
And here are some choice quotes -
“When John McFall (Dumbarton) gets to his feet I shout ‘go back to Scotland, you’ve already banned it.’
Interrupting Gerald Kaufman during one of his lengthy and over-precise questions to the minister, I heard myself baying ’shut up, you pompous prat.’
I even found myself barracking our very own Ann Widdecombe. As she spoke eloquently about hounds pursuing foxes, I kept interrupting: ‘yes but what about your cats?’”
“Nicholas Soames is master of the angry outburst. His verdict on Alun Michael - the rural affairs minister given the job of explaining the government’s proposals - was a classic: “I would hang him up in a game larder - by his nostrils.”
The ‘go back to Scotland’ line is especially jaw-dropping from our prospective PM. If you said “go back to Pakistan” to a Pakistani, or even “go back to Ireland” to an Irishman - even as a supposed “joke” - there’d be a pretty straightforward word to describe the sentiment.
236. “The ‘go back to Scotland’ line is especially jaw-dropping from our prospective PM. If you said “go back to Pakistan” to a Pakistani, or even “go back to Ireland” to an Irishman - even as a supposed “joke” - there’d be a pretty straightforward word to describe the sentiment”
Did you even read the context? Or even the rest of the sentence?
237. “Did you even read the context? Or even the rest of the sentence?”
This may astonish you, Andrew, but I managed the entire text of the article. It made for a grim few minutes, but nevertheless enlightening.
235-Who would you rather a copper arrested, someone who beat up a granny for her pension book, or someone who called a police horse gay?
One is a hate crime. Apparently.
236,FFS,the article was from 2002.
238. Jolly good. Because it’s obviously a reference to the West Lothian Question, isn’t it. Cameron making the point that a Scottish MP shouldn’t be putting a case for the ban of anything in England and Wales.
If you want some examples of anti-Scottish sentiment to get fired up about, I’m sure there’s richer pickings elsewhere.
223
‘The majority of Liberal Democrat MPs in the House of Commons support a hunting ban’
Do a majority of Lib Dem MP’s also support a ban on Halal slaughter?afterall what’s a few hundred foxes getting killed every year compared with thousands of animals killed everyday by this institutionalised cruelty.
238 In which case you will realise that the context was one of the West Lothian Question: Go back to Scotland[where you live, and where you have already banned it: don't wish your views on England].
I think Cameron should say it is something he will revisit, likewise the IHT - but getting the country back on it’s feet after what Labour has inflicted on it must take priority.
241,exactly.
241. “Jolly good. Because it’s obviously a reference to the West Lothian Question, isn’t it. Cameron making the point that a Scottish MP shouldn’t be putting a case for the ban of anything in England and Wales.”
So the WLQ justifies straightforward Jock-bashing from senior politicians? And, of course, couched in the weasel word form of, ‘ah, but of course I wouldn’t actually say any of that, because I’m such a mature guy’. If any Scottish politician had said that about an Englishman, there’d be outrage on these pages, and rightly so.
“If you want some examples of anti-Scottish sentiment to get fired up about, I’m sure there’s richer pickings elsewhere.”
From Cameron himself? I hope for everyone’s sake that you’re wrong.
242-Wonder how the religion of peace would respond to an attack on Halal buthcers.
But this really is the unholy alliance that Labour has constructed. From single mums (apparently) to quangocrats to immigrants. What have they got in common?
Apart from state dependency.
“Foxhunters were given an added boost after a judge ruled that covert filming by anti-hunt activists must be authorised in line with procedures in the Regulation of Investigating Powers Act.
The Act must be used in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights and official guidelines state: ‘It also requires, in particular, those authorising the use of covert techniques to give proper consideration to whether their use is necessary and proportionate.’
This suggests that surveillance carried out by hunt monitors and organisations cannot be authorised because it is not necessary or proportionate for the prevention or detection of an offence under the Hunting Act.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1238362/Hunting-supporters-believe-Tory-election-win-end-ban.html#ixzz0anqwV3Ul
242, the lib dems should be called the illiberal democrats
Cameron said himself, of what he had said, in the heat of the moment:-
“It was pathetic. And not even particularly amusing”
To be honest, I can’t see anything particularly shocking in that article.
250. “To be honest, I can’t see anything particularly shocking in that article.”
I’m not terribly surprised by that, Sean. I’m confident my point stands.
251 I think you’re being over-sensitive.
MPs say rude things to each other during the course of passionate debates. People don’t take it very seriously.
251, ah, confidence. Where would Xerxes have got without it?
250 - Precisely. And let’s not forget he was writing for the Guardian and I imagine was doing a bit of a wind-up too.
Read Chris Mullin’s diaries for a highly flattering and credible portrayal of the young Parliamentary Cameron.
253 A lower Scrabble score?
Jock-bashing? Pathetic. Easterross is the go-to chap for genealogy, but Cameron is a Scot himself.
255, he was thwarted by his successor, Artaxerxes
252. “I think you’re being over-sensitive.”
Yep, that pretty much is the apologists’ defence down the decades for the “go back home, you’re not wanted here” jibe.
240. “FFS,the article was from 2002.”
Which is precisely why it’s so significant. It was his pre-leadership days when he didn’t need to keep his guard up - a valuable insight into the real man.
258 It’s trivial.
256. “Easterross is the go-to chap for genealogy, but Cameron is a Scot himself.”
Oh, is that in the same sense that my surname and ancestry makes me an Irishman? I seem to have mislaid my Irish passport…
258, your party f*cked up devolution. If you want to have a hissyfit about it causing English nationalism attack the Labour clowns who unnecessarily promised it.
258, your party f***ed up devolution. If you want to have a hissyfit about it causing English nationalism attack the Labour clowns who unnecessarily promised it.
259. “It’s trivial.”
It’s telling, Sean.
249. Wow,did you think of that alternative title all on your own? The LDs operate within the context of their constitution, the preamble to which includes the following:-
The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.
In an imperfect world, ‘balance’ is key and overall the LDs succeed in meeting the demands of the above aims.
261. “If you want to have a hissyfit about it causing English nationalism attack the Labour clowns who unnecessarily promised it.”
Hmm, you’ll have to guide me through the section in which I expressed the remotest displeasure about Labour finally delivering on devolution, albeit twenty years late, and in far too weak a form.
262 So why should a Scottish MP have a vote on whether fox hunting should be legal in England? Why don’t Scottish Labour MPs abstain on issues that only affect England? After all, English MPs had no say on fox hunting in Scotland.
On this day, we should all remember the victims of the Tsunami.
Perhaps we should observe a 4 minutes silence.
We should remember the victims and join together and say “Never Again”.
We must prevent Tsunamis happening ever again.
258,rubbish,just look at post 241 for your answer and get over your little scotland insecurity
264, are you not attacking what you see as English nationalism? From whence did this feeling arise? Could it not be the electoral disenfranchisemen Labour’s ill-thought out and unnecessary devolution?
Weird. I had a post in moderation for using the f-word (fair enough), but got another in now which has no word I can see that should be banned.
265. This may surprise you, John, but as a Scottish nationalist I don’t think Scottish MPs should have had a vote on English and Welsh fox-hunting legislation. But I also don’t think there are “political justifications” for offensive, borderline-racist remarks from politicians - in any circumstances. Perhaps you disagree?
12. Well they’ve already serached his former flat in London. Its not exactly in cheapsville either so he had a few quid from somewhere.
The explosive appeared to much like an indoor firework and actually set off the smoke alarm.
267. “rubbish,just look at post 241 for your answer and get over your little scotland insecurity”
Johnno, always a delight.
261 Well said. I find the WLQ the most peculiar [and deliberate] move by Labour to cock it up.
It makes no sense to a) have let this happen in the first place and b) not to fix in all the years it’s been an issue.
I’m sick to death of Labour’s quite obvious dislike of the English as a group.
If Cameron pledges to sort this out PDQ then I’d almost forgive him for being a greenie numpty
269, borderline-racist? Reminds me of this:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/public-accounts/2009/09/obama-hannan-racism-cameron
Oooh, smeary.
273. I can only repeat - if the “go back home” remark had been said about someone from Pakistan, or even from Ireland, there’d be no “borderline” about it.
If anyone genuinely does think this is a trivial matter, I seriously ask them to just reflect seriously for a moment on what would be the response on these pages if an SNP politician wrote an article in which they suggested that an English politician in the Scottish Parliament ought to “go back to England”.
I quite liked JohnR’s idea of having Scottish sepoys in the British Army after Scottish split from the UK. They could have ‘ethnic’ ration packs of oats, a mars bars and a cube of congealed batter.
Meanwhile Obama’s rating plunge further.
Here is the timeline of his approval ratings over 2009…
January 65%
February 60%
July 55%
August 50%
December 45%
We cannot expect him to reach a theoretical zero as his ratings have improved amongst afro-americans
274, do Pakistani MPs get to vote on law that doesn’t affect them or their constituents?
Your party’s created an unbalanced political situation on a whim, leaving Englishmen as second class voters. Being all mean to a Scotsman is a feather beside a freight train of coal when it comes to wrongs between Scotland and the rest of the UK.
Salmond stated he wanted Westminster to dance to a Scottish tune. What I want is for proper electoral accountability. The Scots already have unfair voting advantages, and the SNP want to actively dictate policy to the 95% of the UK they do not represent. As a Galilean carpenter once said, you’ve got a beam in your eye.
I can testify from personal experience that hunting is not just a sport for the posh. My father-in-law, now dead and greatly missed, was a dyed-in-the-wool working class Labour voter from Coventry and an avid follower of the Warwickshire Hunt. We used to go every boxing day to see the hunt off and would sometimes follow it on foot and via car as it weaved its way across the countryside. It was a wonderful sight.
It may not have been a big deal for a lot of people, but Labour lost his vote the day the ban was introduced and never got it back.
Is there any plan, or suggestion, to extend devolution in Scotland?
The regions could be given referenda on suceding from Scotland.
249-Come on!
How many people really know about the LDs and what they stand for? For most people they are the middle class non-Tory/non-Labour party. They had some profile over Iraq. Now? I cannot believe in their SW strongholds with their anti-EU views, peope really know what they stand for. On the other hand they also stand for whatever you need me to stand for in order to win. Are you sure Bill Cliton is not a member?
274 James Kelly,
“Go back home” or “Stay in your own land” is frequently heard by English people in Scotland.
Call it an inferiority complex of Small fish cant hack the big pond?
Scottish Nationalists are petty racists.
276. “do Pakistani MPs get to vote on law that doesn’t affect them or their constituents?”
The fact that you ask that rather neatly illustrates my point in post 269. Evidently some feel that there are legitimate “political excuses” for offensive remarks.
“Your party’s created an unbalanced political situation on a whim, leaving Englishmen as second class voters.”
You’ve completely lost me there. How have the SNP done that?
“the SNP want to actively dictate policy to the 95% of the UK they do not represent.”
By holding the balance of power in the United Kingdom parliament through a legitimate democratic process, and by voluntarily making clear they will abstain on votes relating to England only, as they have consistently done since devolution? I really don’t think you’ve thought this one through.
280. ““Go back home” or “Stay in your own land” is frequently heard by English people in Scotland…Scottish Nationalists are petty racists.”
If such things were said by Scottish Nationalists, they would indeed be petty racists. It also just happens to be the type of remark that would pretty much guarantee disciplinary action from the SNP.
Racism is repugnant wherever it is encountered, and whoever it is directed against. But thankyou for illustrating precisely the type of company Cameron put himself in with that “trivial” remark.
274 Perhaps it’s pertinent to point out that NoOffenceAlan chose his handle in response to his colleagues/neighbours being disparaging about the English.
280 - That doesn’t make what Cameron writes right though, does it?
266 Ken - we can’t prevent tsunamis from happening; they are acts of God. What we can do is to introduce effective early warning systems to enable people to escape their worst effects.
283. Perhaps it would be pertinent to point out that I’ve been aware of that for months, Plato. But I’m glad I got my post 282 in before your comment, to dispel your incorrect implication that I’m in any way justifying Cameron-style offensive comments that come in the opposite direction.
12. There is a strong case now for banning ‘Islamic Societies’ in all UK universities. They have been a breeding ground for Islamic terrorists for more than two decades. The latest attempt to blow up a US airliner by a UCL student, almost certainly involved recruitment, brainwashing and co-ordination with foriegn training camps, by the UCL Islamic Society, as friends at UCL tell me. It is full of Islamist nutcases, who regularly defend Islamic terrorism.
287. No there isnt. They are one of the best sources of intelligence available.
282,stop trying to twist the post of PB posters,let me tell you jamie boy(has rab c nesbitt would have put it),the article david cameron wrote in 2002 makes me like him even more
289. “282,stop trying to twist the post of PB posters,let me tell you jamie boy(has rab c nesbitt would have put it),the article david cameron wrote in 2002 makes me like him even more”
Another class post. Keep up the great work, Johnno.
You mean the bit about the forcible repatriation of all Scotsmen, johnno? And the hunting of cats with hounds? And being rude to Ann Widdecombe?
The trouble with Cameron is that he puts forward attractive policies and then says the opposite - as here where he immediately apologises.
Consequently, you can have no idea where he really stands. If I were you, I would not vote Conservative on the basis of what Cameron says, johnno.
284 Don’t think it makes it wrong either. He is expressing his opinions in a blokeish, down to earth and forthright manner. We could do more of that in politics.
In James’s favour, at least his party claims not to vote on English-only matters.
In context, I think if an MP of Pakistani origin was trying to introduce something in the UK that we find alien to our culture, but legal in Pakistan - then shouting “go back to Pakistan” would not be racist. But some may disagree.
288 That sounds a bit naieve or perhaps, shall we say “stupid”.
Can you imagine a 1940 government encouraging ‘Nazi Societies’ on the grounds that it provides a good source of intelligence on the Germans.
Labour undermines Britain’s security.
287-Maybe we should stop pussy footing around and actively profile these people at aiprots instead of treating the Swedish nun with the same attention as the bearded zealot in white robes with a whole bucnh of Saudi, Pakistani and Afgan stamps in his passport.
Will anyone be brave enough to say the unthinkable?
Actually yhe Chinese did. After 9/11 they banned a whole host of Arab/Muslim country nationals from flying on their airlines. Must have missed the howls of protest. And YES, I know some terrrorist have non-Muslim country passports.
Especially British. Thanks-NuLabour!
So let me get this straight…
Britain’s economic recovery hangs in the balance;
Our currency’s value has been decimated;
Two and a half million are unemployed and millions have never worked;
Borrowing is out of control and government and personal debt are rocketting;
The whole country’s about to take a tax hit;
We are fighting a bloody war thousands of miles away - the longest in decades;
Morale in the Armed Forces has seldom been lower and people’s faith in the MoD has collapsed;
Hundreds of millions of pounds are about to torn from Higher Education;
Communities are struggling to come to terms with devastating floods and our defences against snow and icy weather are demonstrably inadequate…
… and Labour wants to talk about fox-hunting.
Absolutely pathetic… but simultaneously so charactertistic of this government.
293-Actually plenty on the left pre 22/6/41 were conspicuous by their war sabotaging efforts.
Thank you Labour. The party of people who hate their own country.
Just how large or small, or ethnically/religiously/linguistically different does a population have to be, for offensive remarks about it to become ‘racist’ rather than just ‘offensive’?
Scottish? Cornish? Geordies? Scousers? People from West Bromwich? Those b******s from Cheam?
291 I must have missed the bit where Cameron called for forcible repatriation.
292 - I would very strongl disagree.
Presumably the MP in quesiotn is a British citizen and he is certainly in Parliament to represent British citizens. Picking on his racial background, as opposed to arguing against is views, is clearly racist.
Dog whistling, Sean… :LOL:
288. Well that intelligence didn’t prevent the attempted detonation of the bomb on the airliner by a UCL student! Clearly a ban would be more effective at preventing terrorism, than intelligence. It is the Koran and Islam that are the cause. Until this is admitted and the cause confronted there can be no solution, no end to the crisis.
If we keep treating the symptoms, without addressing the cause, the disease will keep spreading. Innocent lives will be lost because of a lack of political will to act. The time comes to say enough is enough. The Koran violates the rules of of civilised life in the UK and indeed the world. The time has come to ban it.
291,what vote lib dem
curious said’
The trouble with Cameron is that he puts forward attractive policies and then says the opposite - as here where he immediately apologises.
you have some cheek with nickolas clegg(lisbon treaty just for one)with no appologises
294 - Hold on to your hat here, but I have something to say that you may find shocking: it is possible to talk about many subjects at the same time. Talking about fox hunting does not preclude the government - or anyone else - addressing other themes as well.
298 No, it’s making the point that the policies in question are not suited to the UK.
If a white English MP was making the same points, the comment would be “why don’t you go and live in Pakistan?”
299. I thought it was Labour that had initiated the class war dog whistling. Labour has always been the party most notorious for dog whistling to extremist groups - anti-hunt nutcases, Islamic extremists, class hate nutcases, etc, etc.
303 - Quite right. Saying to lefties in the ’sixties “why don’t you go and live in Russia” might have been stupid, but it wasn’t racist.
302 Oh is it? So you won’t mind if the Tories spend some time and effort re-legalising fox hunting and raising the IHT threshold, they will still have plenty of time to fix the economy.
291 Curious, no the problem with Cameron is that he often talks sense, eg about the size of the state, civil liberties, fox hunting, Europe. And then when we actually see the policy it’s just the same old statist, interventionist, micro-managing crap that the present government tries comes out with.
293. Lets get some facts straight Ken.
1. Its an open channel. You drive them out you find harder to penetrate channels in turn. You want to try to just casually go into an established radical muslim group in London? Much harder.
2. Anyone who knows anything of the pattern of radicalisation is that it tends to happen in the teens to early 20s. If you hit 30 without radicalisation the odds are you wont be wont be, ever.
3. Such societies often are a source to attract new converts. These new converts are prime targets for watching because they are usally amongst the most radical. Sitting in a university you spot them a mile off.
4. They are honeypot for foreigners. If the government and security services had their act together then they could selectively decide what foreigners go back home and what foreigners stay to build up profiles of. As yet they don’t.
The most successful intelligence gathering is all about builing pictures of networks, who’s the hard heads, whos the hot heads, who are the moderating influences, who can be compromised. Because we are in a global communications age the intelligence effort needs to be global so you have to work the foreigners as much as you work the home growns.
The intelligence services and successive governments over the last 20-30 years have a lot to answer for in how slack they were in allowing radical Islamic groups to set up on their own patch. From a perception and more importantly an intelligence perspective you need to allow some groups to exist and operate while shutting others..
The comparison with Nazi groups in the Uk is a nonsense. Quite simply a) its a different age and b) as a country there wasnt much of a support base then compared to the support within the Islamic community now which has plenty of ambivalent people as well as enough sympathetic people.
There are three clear strategic soft underbellies of the radical Islamic movement in the UK, two that spring from the its own community, one that springs from outside. I am not going to tell you what those three are but suffice to say that the fact that Im aware of them and you are not makes me very confident that I understand the broad situation better than you do.
308 I think I have summarised your post and decided its a load of old cobblers.
Why the fuss about Camerons comments, it seems a common view that he was a very arrogant man before he became a father.
294 - Is it Labour raising the issue?
Seems the other way round.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/23/foxhunting-repeal-campaign-boxing-day
308. 309.
Sorry ken, Yokel speaks a hell of a lot of sense on this.
286 “…But I’m glad I got my post 282 in before your comment, to dispel your incorrect implication that I’m in any way justifying Cameron-style offensive comments that come in the opposite direction.”
Mr Kelly - I wasn’t implying anything at all - I didn’t reference you or Mr Cameron or infact any political party - I merely pointed out a fact that others may find interesting in this conversation.
You are reading too much into a simple observation.
311 Well good for you.
Kauto Star - what a helluva horse…
Except, johnno, that Cameron does that all the time. It is his strategy - to say one thing and then the contrary, at the same time. I don´t remember that he is irrevocably committed to anything. He just likes to give that impression.
In the article we are talking about, he didn´t have to repeat his remarks - I asssume they were not picked up by Hansard - but he chose to repeat them in the Guardian, showing himself to be a man of passion, and totally committed to hunting. And then to repeat a revolting remark from N Soames, showing that he (Cameron) was really very moderate in his feelings, relatively at least. And then apologises for his intemperance, just to show that he is really nice after all.
As you very well know, the Liberal Democrats were committed to a referendum on the European Constitution, and that was killed off by the French and Dutch. Cameron gave a firm undertaking to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and then… Oh dear…..
Same old Cameron trick, you see, johnno. Does it all the time.
296 Archroy
Given that the term “race” has no specific meaning, and the term “racist” is used to describe those bigots who think there is, and that people should be stereotyped and discriminated against on that basis, your search for terminological exactitude is rather pointless.
In all the examples you quote, people who take these attitudes are exhibiting similar attitudes to other groups of people as racists do.
The point about Cameron is that his actual remark was politically stupid.
The suggestion from a Brit of Scottish extraction who represents an English constituency, that a Brit of Irish extraction who represents a Scottish constituency should “go back to Scotland” may well have been an inept reference to the WL question. A good politician, however, would have used language with accuracy.
Incidentally, what is Cameron’s current policy for removing the English democratic deficit? Clearly MPs from outwith England voting on English only issues is quite wrong, and needs to be addressed.
308 Good points, well made.
I was really surprised after 911/77 that undergraduate Arabic students were reportedly being recruited en masse to try to fill the language/culture skills gap in the Security Services.
It’s not as if we’ve been best buddies with those countries…
312. “Mr Kelly - I wasn’t implying anything at all - I didn’t reference you or Mr Cameron or infact any political party - I merely pointed out a fact that others may find interesting in this conversation.
You are reading too much into a simple observation.”
Ms. Plato, the number at the start of your post indicated you were replying to me, hence my assumption that you were…well, replying to me. However, I do of course realise that one of the first principles of passive-aggression is to make any comments sufficiently ambiguous that they can be easily ‘clarified’ at a later point as being totally innocuous, and as not meaning what they appeared to mean.
I commend you on your peerless expertise in your specialist field, and wish you a very pleasant Boxing Day.
317 - “296 Archroy
Given that the term “race” has no specific meaning, and the term “racist” is used to describe those bigots who think there is, and that people should be stereotyped and discriminated against on that basis, your search for terminological exactitude is rather pointless.”
Which is just the point I was making.
I can’t see how “go back to Scotland, you’ve already banned it” can be anything other than a reference to the ban that the Scottish parliament had already introduced and that Cameron’s comment was that a Scottish politician (i.e. one representing a Scottish constituency) shouldn’t have any say on a ban applying only to England and Wales.
The context is everything and as such the comment was quite different from “go back to [where you were born | where your ethnic origin is]“.
317-haha! Indeed foreigners do not generally distinguish between English, Scots, Welsh, Irish (north and south).
As you well know the Istrians are SOOO different from the Dalmatians….
89. That clown Tim going on about the Orange Order being bad news as a backer. Is he aware that the Scottish Loyal Orange Order is backing the Scottish Labour Party?
Scum backing slime - a perfect marriage
Oh sad news - missing boy found dead.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/8431040.stm
306 Or indeed, saying to someone who wants to introduce Sharia Law, “why don’t you go and live in Saudi Arabia?” Context is everything.
318 I believe it’s some sort of “English votes for English laws”.
Which will do until we can have a proper constitutional convention.
Personally I think we should either run Scotland and Wales as colonies, or give them their independence, possibly by means of an English UDI.
317,curious said,
As you very well know, the Liberal Democrats were committed to a referendum on the European Constitution, and that was killed off by the French and Dutch. Cameron gave a firm undertaking to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and then… Oh dear…..
silly me,I thought our (the british) referendum was killed off by labour and the LIB DEMS.
300. Said suspect was on a watch list Will
The failure was a intelligence & security one to spot his risk level. What we cant be sure of yet is the details of how linked he is and his network. The other questions are who paid for the flat of his and what technical support was provided. His method was clever though not an impossible to work out. When you are really on top of the opponent you spot their technical advances before they execute.
328 The Constitution ran to c 400 pages, the Treaty to c 270 pages - these documents are not interchangeable. It was the Constitution that the Lib Dems promised a referendum on, but that was not a document that was available to any country to adjudicate on. Cameron promised a referendum after the constitution was withdrawn as an option. It’s the Tories who have questions to answer.
If you’re feeling lucky - it’s a rollover tonight on the National Lottery.
http://www.national-lottery.co.uk
Hi, hope everyone had a nice Xmas! Haven’t been on much, my excuse being a Star Trek movie DVD marathon, still in progress (um, I got a 10-disc box-set for Xmas!).
On topic, I have been a veggie-saurus since I was 16 (over 18 years ago!), and I used to support Labour whole-heartedly because they were in favour of a ban (though they took their time to implement it!).
But 12 years on, I’m afraid that:
a) Labour are crap (
)
b) I am swayed at least to some extent by the civil liberties aspects
Congrats to both Plato and ChristinaD for finishing so far up the field in POTY.
330-The Constitution ran to c 400 pages, the Treaty to c 270 pages - these documents are not interchangeable. It was the Constitution that the Lib Dems promised a referendum on.
Oh yes, and the tooth fairy too.
‘I can only repeat - if the “go back home” remark had been said about someone from Pakistan, or even from Ireland, there’d be no “borderline” about it.’
If it was said about an MP for Lahore Central or Limerick East voting on purley English laws it wouldn’t be.
If it was said about an MP for a English constituency who was of Pakistani or Irish ethnicity it would be.
What is racist is creating a political system where English people (of whatever ethnic origin) are treated as second class citizens in their own country.
It is another black mark against the Cameron leadership that he is proposing nothing to deal with the present constitutional mess.
The first thing that Cameron has to do - after looking over the countries accounts - is to end or rewrite he stupid Human Rights law.
THIS LAW HAS BECOME CHARTER FOR TERRORISTS AND CRIMINALS TO ESCAPE PUNISHMENT.
So it seems this Nigerian Student immigrant came into Britain on a Student Visa.
330,frank,when the lib dems did the u-turn on the referendum,deep down,you know that was wrong did’nt you,so the excuse of 400 pages to 270 pages is just
The last thing I forgot to mention is that a guy is on a watch list was apparently on a one way ticket….intelligence & security failure?
I’d say so.
So it seems this Nigerian Student immigrant came into Britain on a Student Visa.
The Student Visa has been one of the major mechanisms Labour has introduced to increase immigration. Because of the dropping of all checks, it has made it very easy for terrorists to enter Britain.
Clearly, the Intelligent solution is to stop Terrorists getting into our country rather than letting in so “we can study them”.
Kick Labour out. Ban Political Correctness. Take Control of Our Country.
334. I’m sorry to have brought facts into the debate. Don’t quite understand what your response does to address them. I copy below the relevant section of the manifesto for your benefit:
We are therefore clear in our support for the
constitution, which we believe is in
Britain’s interest – but ratification
must be subject to a referendum of
the British people.
Please note the word CONSTITUTION. It is spelt somewhat differently to TREATY.
309. Yokel, we have often agreed in most things. Most memorably that Brown would be a disaster several years ago.
On this however I think that the case is overwhelmingly in favour of a ban.
Saying that ‘Islamic Societies’ would help surveillance is one of the fallacies of intelligence history. The trojan horse operates the other way. It is like saying we should all take cyanide as it helps to kill germs! A very bad thing, that offers a small good, does not become a good thing.
The security services always tend to overestimate themselves, and under-estimate the enemy. The Kerensky government’s military intelligence inducted and armed the Bolsheviks because they thought this was a way to hold on to power. The CIA under Charlie Wilson inducted and armed al Qaeda to the tune of many billions. The CIA colluded in the overthrow of the Shah in 1979. How did all of these things go. Did the USA win or lose. It lost. It was humiliated when the Iranian Islamists invaded the US embassy and paraded caputured US civilians like infidel slaves.
Al Qaeda humiliates the USA through parading a captured prisoner and attempting to blow up a US airliner on Christmas Day! This is an overt attack on Christendom and the West. What is the US and UK response? A pathetic whimper.
And it was done using a UCL student educated in the UK!!! Where is Gordon Brown’s outrage? He hasn’t even promised to ban it’s Islamic Society!
Through allowing Islamic Societies in UK universities to operate we are allowing mass radicialisation, brainwashing, terrorist attacks, and serious esclating future violence. It can only go one way. The slight benefit to surveillance is greatly outweighed by the harm of enemy recruitment mobilisation.
Have the UK security services gone native? Are they helping the enemy? It certainly looks like it. The complaints have been resounding for years.
Most books on CIA history show it has been colluding in Islamic terrorism and expansionism for more than 60 years! Only for a brief period between in 2004 and 2008 were such activities reined in when Bush sacked the offending department heads. The sole purpose of the CIA has been to ‘re-fight the Second World War’, enslave Europe, attack right-wing parties, and force third world colonisation. It has no interest whatsoever in defeating Islam or Islamic terrorism.
The UK security services are themselves out-of-control, and were for years heavily infiltrated by the Communists they were supposed to be defending us from (as the many MI6 spy scandals prove). Newly released papers from the KGB reveal that they thought they largely controlled US domestic policy through-out the post-war period.
The single biggest victory in the war on Islamic terrorism would be to abolish both MI6 and the CIA, and replace them with completely new organisations 100% focused on defeating the Islam and the Islamic terrorist enemy.
Remember, even the Labour Defence Minister has publicly complained about Obama/CIA interference being the cause of anti-war press coverage in the UK since the summer of this year. He is right.
342, the word ‘cretin’ is spelt differently to ‘idiot’, and if I lower the font size or use shorter words I can make a printout use up fewer pages. It doesn’t make it a different document as regards substance.
The Lib Dems showed all the fighting spirit of a pacifist Frenchman when it came to defending the British right for a referendum. It could scarcely have been less dignified if Clegg had pulled down his trousers, planted his hands on the ground and inserted a white flag in his posterior.
That would, however, have been more honest.
333 Thanks PfP - I was VERY surprised and jolly flattered to get on the list at all!
Many thanks to everyone who said kind things and thought of me - I voted for 4 of the top posters, so will be delighted whichever wins as they are all most worthy of the title POTY
341 Ha. Look it must be different because it is spelt different.
Its ok you wont be executed. You will only get guillotined.
“Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet?“
Oh dear, johnno. Give up…
You are talking nonsense, you know.
Stupid number changes. My prior post is in response to “frank December 26th, 2009 at 3:43 pm”.
Mike
Are you going to seek manifestos from the POTY finalists?
338. To have backed the vote to have a referendum on the Treaty would have been very easy politically for the LDs as it would not have passed in any event. The maths were stacked against a positive vote. Whether you like it or not, the LDs chose not to support a referendum motion for the reason I noted above.
339 He had a one-way ticket?!??!
I didn’t think it was possible to enter the US with one of those as it’s an obvious indicator that the passenger may abscond [hence he shouldn't have got on the flight at all].
341-So they are totally different. Maybe you know more than the author of both, M Giuscard d’Estaing. - who, among others, disagreed. Face it. Tony was bounced into a referendum in 2004 and got lucky (again) when French and Dutch pooh poohd it, and Labour got a bye.
Guess they dropped the bit about anthems and other nonsense to make it totally different though.
Howevert, for example, the Spanish press (and tv), has no difficulty identifying both as the the same (federalizing) doucment. But perhaps, maybe you can tell us why they are so so different?
349 And, let’s be honest about it, never had any intention of fulfilling their manifesto commitment.
Morris, you are getting carried away with your fantasies, I fear.
Since there could be no referendum on the CONSTITUTION, since there was no longer a constitution to have referendum over, they went instead for a referendum on the EUROPE IN OR OUT principle.
Both Tories and Labour refused to back this proposal at the time. And so this too died.
The problem with the Conservatives over Europe - in nutshell - is that they are simultaneously in favour of staying in and in favour of coming out. Another example of Cameron saying two contradictory things simultaneously.
I do thinnk Mr Cameron is marvellous. You couldn´t make him up (unless you were Sean T, of course).
342-We should import hard nosed Mossadites.
“British” Muslims will one day do something so horrible that we will have our very own Kristallnacht. Long term bet: more BNP MPs, not sure about government though–
Oh yes, and fox huntng as an issue will nt be on the radar. As it is now actually.
343 Using smaller fonts or words? You really are clutching at straws. I don’t know if there legal definitions of cretin or idoit, but for sure legal definitions exist for treaty and constitution. It is the understanding of the distinction that explains the decision that the LDs reached.
354 And is there anyone who seriously believes that that was an honest attempt to assess public opinion, or that Lib Dem MPs would vote to repeal the European Communities Act, simply because a bare majority of the voters wished to pull out?
Do you have any evidence for saying that, Sean Fear? At 353.
This is getting very nasty.
349. Frank.
Simply wrong.
The LDs abstained on a referendum in the Commons - if they’d abided by their manifesto and supported it it would have passed; they opposed it in the Lords - if they’d have even abstained it would have passed.
I expected Labour to renege on their pledge - I expected better from a party that calls itself the Liberal Democrats.
356 A specialist in Public International Law might be able to spot some differences between the two documents, but the relevant House of Commons Select Committee regarded them as essentially the same.
The whole of Europe except British leftists acknowledge the treaty is the same as the constitution. Removing a flag and anthem (which have existed for years anyway) makes no difference.
It is nonsense such as this that makes people lack trust in politics.
358 Their behaviour.
Most certainly, Sean (at 357). You can´t judge everybody by your own standards.
363 Round objects, curious, and you know it.
352. D’Estang actually compared his role as akin to that discharged by the founding fathers of the US constitution and I sense that his vanity and need to save afce obscured the truth that the documents were not at all the same.
Time, I think, to leave the site to Tory creators of myth and spin. Do enjoy the rest of Boxing Day talking to yourselves.
363. “or that Lib Dem MPs would vote to repeal the European Communities Act, simply because a bare majority of the voters wished to pull out?”
For what it’s worth, I’m not a Liberal Democrat, and I think they probably would. Unless some kind of ‘fancy franchise’ had been specified in advance.
342. The Americans are broadly years ahead of the UK in their watching of their own borders. The list that this guy was on was a US initiated one from what I gather.
The entire effort, however, is also immature and could take another 5 years of progress to become mature. The sheer size of the number of those on the likes of watch lists is a testament to the scale of the threat but also the lack of refinement in the effort so far. It is absolutely true that the West let the radicals run for a long time and indeed worked with them. Their failure to see the shifting ground or, if they did, slowness to react should be subject to investigation.
I have no issues with shutting things down if they are a problem where the gain is limited against letting it run and you’d be correct that the intelligence community often overestimates itself. It gets itself caught up in investigations to the point of missing when to shut things down or when to issue & obey a burn notice and so on. Happens plenty.
At this stage, however, the UK has, with partial success, targeted the more open channels. Its by no means complete, nowhere near and that lack of refinement is a problem.
If I was an Islamicist radical I’d be more concerned if they did shut down the likes of the University societies. I’d be asking why now.
There is also the political argument which I have no doubt weighs very heavily on any government. Frankly the politicians, and I dont expect the incoming Tory administration to be much different, refuse to wholly grasp the nettle when it comes to the Islamic radical groups in its midst and indeed the ambivalence of the wider Islamic community.
Even when the intelligence & security argument is sound the political arguments will win out at times. My view is more practical. If the resources available cant track enough people then ship the foreign suspects home or if some human rights lawyers gets on the case just make the subjects’ lives a misery and hound them out.
Evidence so far is that most of those foreigners being watched are indeed students rather than illegals and there is a hole in the student visa scheme. I can be fairly sure though that part of that hole is due to poor management but part of it is because the intelligence services choose to keep it open.
OT [is that possible?]
One of the most
Christmas present comments I’ve come across so far:
“iaindale Just opened a shirt. Dad says “that’s like they used to wear in Auschwitz.” Er… “
The truth is if a referendum in favour of leaving the EU was passed a LibDem government would ignore it.
Instead we would hear all the usual weasel words such as ‘clarification’ and ‘renegotiation’ and ‘further consultation’ and a promise for future referendum where the people would get the chance to think again. this second referendum would never though take place.
The fact that some LibDem MPs such as Tim Farron were in favour of a referendum proves that Frank and Curious are wrong.
358.
BBC reported the vote as
The House of Commons turned down the Conservative proposal by 311 votes to 248 - a margin of 63.
That included 13 LDs who voted in favour of the Tory proposal. That would leave c.50 LDs. Had they all voted in favour the Tory proposal would be still be short. 29 Labour MPs supported the proposal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7277644.stm
369. Why precisely?
frank
When has a vote against the EU ever been respected?
How many more Labour MPs would have rebelled had they known that the Lib Dems weren’t shamelessly reneging on their manifesto pledge and thus there would have been a point?
And what about the abstain in one house/oppose in the other nonsense they pulled?
And worst, most LDs seem to be PROUD of what they did.
372. Norway in 1994 chose not to join - they remain outside the Union. 1984 I believe Greenland withdrew from the EEC.
My question as to “why” related to your assertion that as Tim Farron chose to vote in favour of a referendum whilst 80% of the LD parliamentary party didn’t, it made my observations invalid.
372-I think only in abeyance.
Norway voted NO a couple of times and it was respected (but not totally off the agenda), at least they were not subjected to neverendums. Swedish and Danish NO to the Euro have been respected; so far…
I think though the relation between the UK and the EU is going to get to (another) crunch point. Will Cam keel over and become the EUs catamite or will he stand up for Britain? Not sure. The larger the majority the less wriggle room he’ll have though. I have my ears out for how the Euro-elite view Cam becoming PM, nothing so far, but as we approach May there’ll be more, I hope, fearful voices….
and BTW Gordon and Labour are seen as Eurosceptic across the water….
David Cameron, after his embrace of Zac Goldsmith over Green issues should surely now embrace Otis Ferry on fox hunting.
Posters of Dave n Zac n Otis in full hunting gear would work really well for the Conservative Party.
IF you want to ban something, then why not Mebyon Kernow? Because IF left unchecked, they will eventually drive you Saxons back to the vicinity of the Pripet Marshes!
Have to come down on the side on Yokel on this one. Both on philosophical grounds and because I suspect that he’s got some very up-close-and-personal experience with the subject.
BTW, how come no women on the PBer of the Year shortlist?
Perhaps to even the score, we could let ChristinaD, Marcia & other distaff pbers officate at the Dance-Off?
And is there going to be a PBer of the “Oughts” Decade?
374-Didn’t Greenalnd leave January 1981? Guess vote must have been 1980?
372. “When has a vote against the EU ever been respected?”
In this country? There’s only been one referendum and that was a yes.
If you mean in other countries, there are plenty of examples - Sweden’s “no” to the euro, for instance.
373. We are now erring into the arena of crystal ball gazing. As I noted above, the LDs could not have swung the vote in favour in any event - do the math. The LDs did not renage on their commitment.
380-Surely they were in favour of a referendum on the Constitution. And changing its name does not mean they did not renege on their promise.
381 - I refer the Hon Gentleman to my previous answers.
frank
The actions of Farron and the others shows that voting for a referendum was the honourable choice. That the LibDem leadership opposed it is just another example of how much the LibDem party has a cultural cringe towards the EU.
Are you not embarrassed to be a supporter of an organisation that openly despises democracy?
380 The basis of your argumnet that the LibDems did not renege on their commitment is fallacious. You suppose that because the Constitution was a single text, replacing all previous treaties, that it was somehow inherently different to an amending treaty. That is simply ludicrous. For example, the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 repealed most trade union law that had existed prior to the passage of the Act, and consolidated them into a single text. Trade union law was virtually unchanged by the Act. By contrast, the Licensing Act 2003 amended the Licensing Act 1964 to such an extent that the legislative scheme was changed substantially. Yet the amended 1964 Act remains the principal licensing legislation.
Your argument shows little legal understanding. It does not matter whether the means of legal change are line-by-line amendment or total supersession. What matters is the net result. The net result of the Lisbon Treaty was identical to that of the European Constitution. It follows, therefore, that the LibDems did renege on their commitment.
382-Did they renege on their promise: yes.
Could they have swung the maths: not sure, upthread it seems yes, but at the time was not aware they could have so not sure…
Fox reporting that bomber was son of banker [may help to explain that mansion flat]
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581180,00.html
383. I would hope you would respect all votes as honourable even if you don;t always agree with them. You agree with Tim and I don’t. As a democrat I can live with that.
If the only concern of the LDs was take political advantage - knowing that their votes would not secure a referendum on the Treaty in any event - they could have all voted in favour and have another reason to kick Labour and deprive the Tories of their spurious charge of failing to honour a manifesto commitment.
Those who advance the points that you do, have just not thought the whole argument through.
“Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the UK would take “whatever action was necessary” to protect passengers.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8430872.stm
What on earth does “whatever action necessary” mean, Gordon? Compulsory ID cards? Banning people with certain skin colours or racial profiles from flying? Strapping passengers into strait-jackets for the duration of their flight?
If you have proposals - make them. If you have nothing to say, then just say nothing. Personally, I’d be giving people some confidence that the UK educations system really doesn’t allow absolutely anyone with a letter signed by a local “worthy” to come here…because it looks like the system of access into this country has totally broken down on Labour’s watch. Our borders are not remotely secure.
‘If you mean in other countries, there are plenty of examples - Sweden’s “no” to the euro, for instance.’
A vote the Swedish political establishment tolerates in bad grace and looks to reverse in a referendum soon. I suspect if Sweden had voted in favour of the Euro in 2003 they wouldn’t be getting a chance to change their minds.
And how about the Danish No to Maastricht or the Irish Nos to Nice and Lisbon or the Dutch and French Nos to the Constitution?
380 “the LDs could not have swung the vote in favour in any event”
But they could have de-linked themselves from Labour, leaving Labour alone to take the opprobrium of reneging on a manifesto commitment. And they could later have pointed to Cameron’s “cast iron guarnatee” and, miraculously, appeared to be the only honourable party on Europe.
Very poor politics from the LD’s if nothing else.
384. I’ve been a corporate lawyer for more years than I care to remember so have a reasonable grasp of legal matters.
390. Arguably so and I am certain it may have proved a tempting option at the time of the vote. But they chose not to take the easy option and go with what they regarded as the correct decision.
The Lib Dems want my vote. They might get it. First I want answers to two questions:
1) Why should I believe anything they promise in their manifesto when they broke the only promise in their 2005 manifesto that they had the opportunity to implement?
2) In what circumstances would they allow a Labour government to stay in office?
If I get no satisfactory answers, I shall draw my own conclusions.
391 If so, then address the point. The consolidated texts of the TEU and the TFEU as amended by Lisbon are 96% similar, when compared article by article, to the European Constitution. If the Conservatives pledged to repeal the Indentity Cards Act 2006, did so, but then in the same bill enacted identical provisions to the repealed Act, would they have reneged on their pledge? Of course they would have, because the net effect of the repeal and re-enactment would be the same as not repealing the original Act at all.
Re: the Christmas Day airliner terrorist incident, does anyone besides me think it ironic that the person who told the press that the culprit is on a watch list is none other than Rep. Peter King (R-NY & IRA). AND that he’s the ranking GOP member of the House Homeland Security committee?
On the EU treaty/constitution…
… even if we accept the Lisbon Treaty and the Constitution are two very different documents…
… what’s so wrong with offering people a vote on the Treaty?
395-As you know one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter!
But was not there a reaction in the US against terrrorism (including NorAid, etc) post 9/11 in the US? To his credit I think Peter King was involved.
Ultimately politics isn’t about what you do because you’ll always get booted out in the end. Its about what you do that the other lot can’t or won’t undo when they get back in.That’s your legacy. Its the difference between the line of compromise you inherited and the one you leave behind. As we approach the 13 year mark its interesting if a little absurd that fox hunting is the resistantce point. cameron has been brilliant in simply accepting or indeed apologising for previous oppositions ( the Scottish Parliament, Section 28 ) or counter intuitively protecting Labour successes ( Ring fencing Foriegn Aid budgets ) or kicking into the long grass ( accepting Lisbon )
Its both a testament to Cameron as a politican and yet a question mark that Fox hunting is all Labour has left to fight on as a contexted legacy item.
Its the crudest of politics but probably worth doing as the pro Hunt people are likely to be energised for the Tories for other reasons. While anti hunt activists are exactly the kind of people who’ll have splintered all over the liberal left for other reasons ( and the Lib Dems are out of the running as a national brand on this issue )
I expect all of this to be a very minor benefit to labour in that they’ll claw back some votes that they should never have lost any. More interesting is it further reveals if any where neccessery how core vote they are going. I’m also intrigued as wether they are just ebing stupid or if focus groups are telling them that class war will play differently post great recession.
At its heart its the most archetypal of picture imagery. Fox Hunters equals Bankers equals Tories.
I posted 395 to goad good old Stars & Stripes. Has anyone heard from him lately?
My own theory is that S&S is either Gov-elect Cristie OR a senior member of his incoming administration.
396. It would be silly to have a referendum on every Treaty a government signs. If you don’t like the treaties a government has signed, chuck the government out and get another one.
Just having a browse through the comments on this piece in the Times about Gordon’s Britishness gimmick.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968087.ece
It struck me that I can’t remember the last time I read an article where the comments were anything other than 98% negative about Labour/Gordon.
Wonder what they’d have said about John Major/Tories?
I do not understand why those who live in the country feel so victimised by a hunting ban. I live in a small town in Northants and know fox hunters and pro fox hunting people (my family used to go and watch the red coated snobs go off on their hunts) and my nan often tries to lecture me on how its such a great tradition thats dying. But I just don’t get the appeal. Its inhumane for christ sake! Why should we create laws to ban barbaric acts such as allowing dog fighting and going the ability to go out shooting whatever animals we find in the woods, when these people will just ride off and do whatever they please. The sheer pompousity of it all angers me a lot. Why should the majority of us abide by such laws yet the rural classes can simply bypass these laws then still get support from the Conservatives who do not even condemn those who flaunt their crimes about.
I really a fear a Cameron government and will never accept the words of those who think he is the most Liberal leader of the Tories they’ve had. He has no backbone. And I doubt he ever will.
394. Not overly keen to get too engaged in a technical legal debate, but my view has been influenced by a number of opinions, including the one linked below from Edinburgh Uni’s Law Faculty
http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:5Q_G7Ch5zXMJ:www.law.ed.ac.uk/conferences/eubacktothefuture/files/pbremnerlisbontreatyabritishperspective.doc+differences+between+constitution+and+lisbon+treaty&cd=18&hl=en&ct=clnk
The final sentence of this paper makes the following observation:
“Therefore, despite its highly significant institutional and constitutional reforms, the Lisbon Treaty, when it comes into force, will rank as just another constitutional document not a formal constitution.”
Therefore, the document is of the same status as previous treaties which parliament, including under the Tories, chose not to treat as a constitution but a treaty, just as Lisbon. The commitment by the LDs in 2005 was specifically in terms of a constitution which a substantial body of legal opinion assets was not on offer when Lisbon was doing the rounds of the various ratifying countries.
Speaking of security, there was an apparently very experienced and well informed talking head on NPR yesterday, saying that US airport security was going to be compromised UNTIL the boys & girls at Homeland Security updated their technology.
Specifically to permit full body scans. Much more effective than making everyone take off their shoes . . . amusing those in line by making middle-aged men risk debagging by making them take off their belts!
Though perhaps the fragrent ChristinaD and other fair PBers consider this entertainment? Somehow I doubt it!
AMENDMENT TO 403
The commitment by the LDs in 2005 was specifically in terms of a constitution which a substantial body of legal opinion asseRts was not on offer when Lisbon was doing the rounds of the various ratifying countries.
Another aspect of the Fox Hunting Kulturekampf is a stark reminder of how illiberal oou society is. My own opposition to the original bill was based on the indivisibility of liberty. Mill sets a harm test. Not an offence test, or tradition test, or what motivates direct mail campaigns test, or a focus group test or disgust test,
Its harm. I’ve always wanted to set the bar very high on harm and have legislation difficult and with a process as a “saucer into which the hot milk… can be pore to cool” as that striking phrase about the Senate goes.
Fox Hunting was Labours Section 28. A badly written, authoritarian, populist, bossy, unenforcible , nasty piece of divide and rule which picked on an unfashionable and stigmatised minority to arouse tribal and often not rationally expressed passions to fuel political campaigns and appease sections of both parties.
Neither addressed any long term socio/economic/cultural/civilisantional challenge that this sceptred isla faced. Governments did them just because they could. One of the mightiest executive systems in the democractic world legislating because legislation is what governments do and harm and its test seems too high a standard these days to retrain the machines legislative OCD.
400. That’s a perfectly valid perspective to have, except in the case when a Government wins power on the basis that it will allow the public to have their say on a particular treaty. In that case it is just a cynical manipulation of the public.
3.
I am not sure what eveidence Mr Grice bases this on:
‘Amid signs that the Tories are playing down the issue, their candidates are said to have been advised not to state their view on’
but as a Candidate in a key marginal I can assure everyone that I have never been given such advice. It has always been clear that the any vote on the issue of foxhunting will be a free vote issue and FWIW I have always publicly stated that if I am elected I will vote to repeal the ban on hunting. I know my stance will mean some lifelong Conservative voters will not vote for me but personally I feel that the issue of openess and honesty is more important. At least voters know where I stand and they can make their own minds up as to whether the issue is so important to them as to determine the way they cast their vote.
Personally I find the majority of people are not that bothered one way or the other and are much more concerned about the state of the economy, our health service, the education system and the level of crime.
398 - To be fair it was the Conservatives that first raised this as an issue and announced it to the Horse and Hounds, Labour was never going to ignore it. It taps into a theme of what a Cameron Admin would be like, ie. what “red meat” is to be thrown the rightwing back benchers.
I’d guess fox hunting, the BBC, sadly I think the plastic fetus wavers will be active and some backbench gob, probably Davies of Shipley will introduce some bill on Capital Punishment..
Any other suggestions?
Four Foxes Ache…
Is this the best Brown can do with rising unemployment, increasing inflation, a high budget deficit, a high trade deficit, falling currency, and ballooning National Debt?
There are more important things in life than the welfare of foxes.
The 2009 PB Poster of the Year - the final round
Voting has started.
402 What interesting language you use Joshua.
“rural classes”
“snobs”
406 - And if they hadn’t done it you’d be arguing they’d broken a manifesto pledge.
393. What was the broken Lib Dem 2005 manifesto promise?
Frank, you may satisfy yourself with such an analysis but you don’t satisfy me. The effects of the Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty were substantially the same. If they weren’t, you’d be reeling off a string of substantial differences. You don’t, because there aren’t.
I should make my position clear. On balance, I would probably have voted to ratify the Lisbon Treaty. I was, however, promised a vote on a document that was substantially the same. I did not get one because of the disregard for past commitments given by two of our three main parties. Such disregard deserves punishment at the ballot box. Were it not for the fact that I have major qualms about the alternatives also, I would long since have been lost to the Lib Dems.
NEW THREAD! GET VOTING NOW.
400 But this treaty contains many of the same things as the EU constitution. However different it is from the constitution - and YMMV - it still has a lot to be said about the UK’s relationship with the EU. To push for an “EU in or out” referendum instead is silly. The argument is about whether the EU is in any way democratic and if we are allowed to argue for a more liberal, libertarian, looser union or not. If the answer is “no”, then that is the time for the in or out referendum - probably within 10 years I’d guess.
404/405 Thanks for the more detailed response. I would draw your attention to this:
“The net effect of these amendments may be very similar to that achieved by the TECE in substantive terms but the Lisbon Treaty does not create a single new constitutional document as the TECE would have done.”
This is the salient point. The effect of Lisbon and the Constitution would have been the same. Furthermore, the use of “constitution” in relation to both treaties was always a misnomer. In relation to the UK, both would have been incorporated into UK law by an Act of Parliament, subject to repeal at any point in the future. In any case, the EU was nevertheless constituted anyway by the Maastritch Treaty: the entrenched set of provisions governing its structures and institutions.
Legally, both treaties would have been adopted and incorporated by the same mechanism in the UK. Neither treaty would have been entrenched or had higher status to UK Acts subject to Factortame. Both the Constitution and Lisbon had the same net effect to European law and had the same net effect to British law. For all intents and purposes they were the same.
Afternoon all
Awesome display by KAUTO STAR in the King George at Kempton though it probably couldn’t have been set up any better for him. A field of potential non-stayers went off too fast and he was the only one travelling a mile out.
On Lisbon, and as an LD, I said at the time and still believe Nick Clegg made a tactical error in not supporting a referendum. The issue was never Lisbon in and of itself - it was the sense in which the British electorate wanted an opportunity to express its dissatisfaction with the EU. The denial of the opportunity to let off steam or have a say is the problem not the minutiae of the Lisbon Treaty.
Cameron’s error was in believing the Treaty would not be ratified before he got to Downing Street. Once Ireland fell into line, the game was up. Rather like the LD numbers in Parliament there was nothing Cameron could say or do in his power at the time to make a difference.
409. I agree entirely that Labour should run with this. Its the fact that this seems like one of their better shots that is so sad not the campaign its self.
Thinking longer term though if you were in the Labour bunker ( not that you are Tim
) and you were planning post occupation resistence then Cameron seems to have left himself with an unusually exposed flank.
Lets think ahead 3 years into a cameron government. What ever the complexities in real life the perception will be that the ban has either not been lifted ( Countryside Alliance types start drifting to UKIP ?) or it has ( the entire animal welfare military industrial complex realigns to Labour )
And of course lets not forget the nightmare senario for Cameron. he’s never said a Conservative government will repeal the Act. Merely that he’ll provide the parliamentry time to do it. What happens if a Conservative government with a majority of 30 finds “it” can’t get it through? On lot will be p***ed that he tried and another will have an archetypal betrayal to be betrayed about for ever.
As I’ve observed before you could find UKIP winning the 2014 Christchurch by election not the Lib Dems.
Re: hunting of all kinds, personal views as urban American with rural roots, is that while I have no wish hunt anything (except perhaps wild 2-legged foxes and cougars) and while I despise the US gun culture and it’s bodycount, I defend hunting both as a pastime and an activity IF it’s properly regulated. With 99% of that being self-regulation.
Politically speaking, think that Labour’s fox hunting ban made calculated gains with select cohorts of voters, for example young & hip LD stragetic voters in marginal suburban constituencies.
On the other hand, it has helped undermine Labour with rural and exurban voters. Not so much because of it’s direct impact - lots of these folks have little or low regard for hunting or hunters) but rather becasue they perceived the fox hunting ban as a propaganda ploy, with rural folks being the boogiemen.
Seems to me the real crisis of rural England/Scotland?Wales/World is the lack of visible or even invisible means of support. Perhaps the internet & other diffusions of technology will redress this. Of coure, same was said for the telegraph and railroad.
Also seems to me that economically realistic rural living COULD be a source of common ground for left, right and center. Why? Because conservatives have a vested interest in preserving rural communities, traditions and (lest we forget) voter support. While the environmental left wants to defend the planet, which means limiting urbanization, tough to achieve if you can’t keep ‘em down on the farm or at least in the country.
420-I for one look forward to a hard right Tory government. I accept I may be in a minoirty.
For now-but I am available to save the UK.
I’m opposed to fox-hunting but Labour’s law is so useless as to be pointless, plus Labour is merrily gassing badgers where e’er it can find them so its compassion for wildlife is sketchy to say the least.
I don’t like fox hunting and I deplore the slaughter of animals for human consumption. However I understand that Labour and you Tory wanabee’s have jointly led the country to financial ruin and deserve nothing other than the grand order of the boot. I just hope Clegg is up to pointing this out big style.
Hvcu0i gmylamfhoqhp, [url=http://ciegjepmphfu.com/]ciegjepmphfu[/url], [link=http://gzklupctsaha.com/]gzklupctsaha[/link], http://xmhozxnviffv.com/
Mike, The leaflet made no difference because it was hardly delivered anywhere. My understanding is that no more than a few hundred went out.