Most people don’t much like hunting, so the more they complain about their lost rights, the more opposition to their cause hardens.
Our guest writer is Liam Raftery, campaigner at the League Against Cruel Sports
Today’s revelations in The Independent that the hunting community is being cajoled into supporting pro-hunting PPCs in marginal constituencies on the promise that a Conservative Government has promised a free vote on repeal of the Hunting Act, proves just one thing: the hunters’ own naivety.
The hunters set up “Vote OK”, a pretty innocuous sounding front for election campaigning by bloodsports enthusiasts, after the Hunting Act was passed in 2004, motivated they claim by Alun Michael MP who said that “…if people wish to continue their opposition to legislation, they have the option of the ballot box through which to express their views”. By supporting PPCs who promise to vote for repeal of the Act, Vote OK claim on their own website to have had impact in recent by-elections and are organising hard for the forthcoming general election.
The problem for the hunters is that public opinion is so far removed from their motivations, a fact highlighted by the Independent. Monthly polling by YouGov on behalf of the League Against Cruel Sports shows that support for repeal of the Hunting Act averages just 24%, with a further poll by ORB commissioned by the Countryside Alliance showing that just 19% support repeal. As the Independent said this morning:
“Most people don’t much like hunting, so the more they complain about their lost rights, the more opposition to their cause hardens.”
Vote OK claim to be promoting democracy but at the same time their website states their clear aim to “take country sports off the political agenda” which, by stifling debate and discussion, is fundamentally undemocratic. They claim to be politically independent and yet they are only working to oust anti-hunting Labour MPs in favour of pro-hunting Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. One of their key campaigners is an agent for a Conservative MP in Wiltshire. This is not political independence.
Their campaign also fails to acknowledge that there is support for the hunting ban right across the political spectrum. A grassroots campaign, Conservatives Against Fox Hunting, launched in January and data collected for our Keep Cruelty History campaign shows that a good number of Conservative PPCs would not support repeal. Amongst Liberal Democrats, support remains high and in some constituencies, such as Torbay, an anti-hunting Liberal Democrat is facing a challenge from an anti-hunting Conservative. Vote OK do not like to be beside that seaside.
Visitors to the Keep Cruelty History website can find out how PPCs in their constituency say they would vote on repeal of the Hunting Act, and many thousands of visitors are doing so. Savvy anti-hunting PPCs around the country are using hunting to raise other animal welfare issues, whilst pro-hunting PPCs are – predictably – tending to keep quiet.
Hunting might not be a key issue alongside health, education and law and order, but it does have a resonance with the public who firmly want to see hunting remain a thing of the past. The Independent leader this morning got it bang on in their “election advice to hunters: let sleeping dogs lie”.
Left Foot Forward doesn't have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
32 Responses to “Six years on, public even more opposed to hunting”
Mr. Sensible
Billy that’s wrong.
And Henry I wonder what the game is?
Left Foot Forward « League Against Cruel Sports
[…] Read it here. […]
Linda
Giles Bradshaw, I sincerely feel very sorry for you, how about just spending time appreciating the beauty of a deer, because they really are very beautiful, rather than having to destroy them, as I said I feel very sorry for you, a little spiritually bankrupt me thinks.
Gary Hills
We are pleased that this issue of Vote OK and the underhand way the hunting lobby operate has been raised. The cloud of hidden secrecy is as deep as Lord Ashcroft. David Cameron encourages Vote OK and it easy to argue he is reliant on them. Yet he is not so keen for the public to know whose knocking at their door. Knocking that is as a Conservative Party canvasser.
Little wonder with the public reaction to blood junkies being at an all time low. Yet these so called canvassers are undermining democracy and deceiving the nation on a grand scale.
Our democracy deserves better than Vote OK and deceptions created to hide their actions. David Cameron’s continues to show again and again that he cares more for a tiny fraction of society then the views of the majority. His love for bloodsport is one of his biggest motivations.
So any message that exposes the risk and harm to our wildlife from a Conservative win is welcome. Below is a direct quote from Vote OK. It clearly states the majority of pro hunting candidates they support are Conservative.
“Nicky Sadler, of Vote-OK, described the organisation yesterday as like a “rural dating agency” that puts hunts and other countryside pressure groups in touch with political parties in marginal seats. “Introductions have been made in 140 seats across the country,” she said. “We are helping some Liberal Democrat and Plaid Cymru candidates, but no Labour. The majority are Conservatives”
There is something however we do disagree with about this article. That is the view that there are a large proportion of Tory candidates who support the hunting ban. That just not the case, the percentage is tiny and the majority of them stand no chance at even winning their seats.
Yet that is beside the point, the Tories with David Cameron will repeal the hunting ban if elected. No tiny band of Tory MPs who oppose hunting will change that. We equally disagree with the group Conservative Against Fox Hunting. For while with the best intentions it fails to help any animals with their man message.
That message and how it comes across is (It’s OK to vote Tory as there are a few fluffy ones) that simply is not the right approach to saving our wildlife. What was lacking I’m sorry to say from this article was any mention of Labour and their candidates. It is fantasy to assume you can protect the hunting ban without Labour in office.
Labour MPs on mass over decades have supported the campaign to bring in the hunting ban. So it stands to reason it is only Labour MPs who will protect the ban now and make it stronger.
Labour MPs have given support to LACS and many animal groups in the past 13 years and beyond. They deserve support and they should be credited for the work they have done.
This view of helping promote Conservatives Against Fox Hunting is not helpful. Nor is it helpful to imply there are mass ranks of Tory candidates in support of the hunting ban. It’s just not the case and it is not a credible message. It also fails to see the real message that needs to be out there.
That message is clear only Labour will protect the hunting ban and ensure it remains. For the welfare of our wildlife it is vital that message is heard.
Gary Hills
Campaign Director
Support the Hunting Act(BAN)UK
Geoffrey Woollard
I do not believe that Giles Bradshaw is a real farmer. A real farmer would never have the time to write such drivel on so many different sites. Get real, Mr Bradshaw, and do some real farming for a change.