Post by Taxigirl on Nov 17, 2004 9:35:04 GMT
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4015075.stm
A ban on fox hunting in England and Wales now looks inevitable after MPs rejected a last-ditch compromise.
The Commons voted by 321 to 204 to reject a deal that could have allowed regulated hunting of foxes to continue.
MPs had already rejected a Lords amendment to allow licensed hunting of foxes, stags and hares.
The vote means that the Hunting Bill returns to peers and if they reject it again the government looks set to force it through using the Parliament Act.
In the often heated Commons debate that preceded the vote on Tuesday, Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael urged people to respect the will of the Commons.
"It is time to fulfil what is a manifesto commitment to enable Parliament to reach a conclusion on this issue," he said.
Tony Blair favoured Ogmore MP Huw Irranca-Davies's compromise amendment to allow licensed hunting of foxes to continue.
But his spokesman denied the prime minister was just seeking cover from pro-hunt anger.
The Tories also backed Mr Irranca-Davies' amendment if only "through gritted teeth", in the words of party spokesman James Gray.
He warned that if hunting was banned "the people of the countryside will neither forget it or forgive it".
Opportunity
The Hunting Bill returns to the House of Lords on Wednesday.
If there is no agreement before this session of Parliament ends on Thursday, the Commons speaker is expected to say the conditions needed for the Parliament Act to be used have been met.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Michael criticised pro-hunting peers over their strategy towards the bill.
"It is not a question of us invoking the Parliament Act.
"The situation at the moment is that for the tenth time in 10 years, the House of Commons has taken a decision by a large majority.
"It is for the House of Lords to respond to that, and if they fail to do so, it is the House of Lords that will provoke the use of the Parliament Act."
Civil disobedience?
Mr Michael added: "The House of Lords has an opportunity now to respond to another common sense proposal the government has put forward, which is to delay a ban until July 2006.
"That delay would allow people to change the sort of activities they are involved in and avoid the sort of animal welfare issues that could come up.
"It is a common sense approach, I hope the House of Lords will accept it."
The delay proposal has not yet been put to the House of Lords, where some pro-hunt peers prefer a "kamikaze" option of rejecting any delay so a ban would come into force within three months.
They believe the anticipated civil disobedience among hunt supporters would then embarrass the government just before the general election.
Legal challenge
The BBC has learned the pro-hunt Countryside Alliance has already written to Attorney General Lord Goldsmith giving notice it will challenge the legality of the 1949 Parliament Act if it is invoked.
There are also plans to take the issue to the European Courts of Human Act on the grounds a ban unfairly denies people trade.
Once a ban goes through, pro-hunt campaigners intend to exploit any loopholes or even openly defy the law. They could also mount political campaigns against Labour MPs in marginal seats.
Simon Hart, president of the pro-hunting Countryside Alliance, said: "This is not the end of our campaign - it is just the beginning of the next stage."
Labour peer Baroness Mallalieu, who is president of the alliance, said the Lords would reject the ban again and a legal challenge could begin by Friday.
But Tony Banks, the Labour MP who has led the campaign to ban hunting, said the legal challenge would not succeed.
"Parliament is the highest court. There is not a superior court. If they want to spend their money, good luck to them - I'm sure they will find a lawyer who will take it," he said.
A ban on fox hunting in England and Wales now looks inevitable after MPs rejected a last-ditch compromise.
The Commons voted by 321 to 204 to reject a deal that could have allowed regulated hunting of foxes to continue.
MPs had already rejected a Lords amendment to allow licensed hunting of foxes, stags and hares.
The vote means that the Hunting Bill returns to peers and if they reject it again the government looks set to force it through using the Parliament Act.
In the often heated Commons debate that preceded the vote on Tuesday, Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael urged people to respect the will of the Commons.
"It is time to fulfil what is a manifesto commitment to enable Parliament to reach a conclusion on this issue," he said.
Tony Blair favoured Ogmore MP Huw Irranca-Davies's compromise amendment to allow licensed hunting of foxes to continue.
But his spokesman denied the prime minister was just seeking cover from pro-hunt anger.
The Tories also backed Mr Irranca-Davies' amendment if only "through gritted teeth", in the words of party spokesman James Gray.
He warned that if hunting was banned "the people of the countryside will neither forget it or forgive it".
Opportunity
The Hunting Bill returns to the House of Lords on Wednesday.
If there is no agreement before this session of Parliament ends on Thursday, the Commons speaker is expected to say the conditions needed for the Parliament Act to be used have been met.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Michael criticised pro-hunting peers over their strategy towards the bill.
"It is not a question of us invoking the Parliament Act.
"The situation at the moment is that for the tenth time in 10 years, the House of Commons has taken a decision by a large majority.
"It is for the House of Lords to respond to that, and if they fail to do so, it is the House of Lords that will provoke the use of the Parliament Act."
Civil disobedience?
Mr Michael added: "The House of Lords has an opportunity now to respond to another common sense proposal the government has put forward, which is to delay a ban until July 2006.
"That delay would allow people to change the sort of activities they are involved in and avoid the sort of animal welfare issues that could come up.
"It is a common sense approach, I hope the House of Lords will accept it."
The delay proposal has not yet been put to the House of Lords, where some pro-hunt peers prefer a "kamikaze" option of rejecting any delay so a ban would come into force within three months.
They believe the anticipated civil disobedience among hunt supporters would then embarrass the government just before the general election.
Legal challenge
The BBC has learned the pro-hunt Countryside Alliance has already written to Attorney General Lord Goldsmith giving notice it will challenge the legality of the 1949 Parliament Act if it is invoked.
There are also plans to take the issue to the European Courts of Human Act on the grounds a ban unfairly denies people trade.
Once a ban goes through, pro-hunt campaigners intend to exploit any loopholes or even openly defy the law. They could also mount political campaigns against Labour MPs in marginal seats.
Simon Hart, president of the pro-hunting Countryside Alliance, said: "This is not the end of our campaign - it is just the beginning of the next stage."
Labour peer Baroness Mallalieu, who is president of the alliance, said the Lords would reject the ban again and a legal challenge could begin by Friday.
But Tony Banks, the Labour MP who has led the campaign to ban hunting, said the legal challenge would not succeed.
"Parliament is the highest court. There is not a superior court. If they want to spend their money, good luck to them - I'm sure they will find a lawyer who will take it," he said.