From the DEFRA website
Jan. 4th, 2005 03:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alixandreaHunting with dogs – a promise fulfilled
The Government has fulfilled its manifesto commitment to enable Parliament to resolve the issue of hunting with dogs in England and Wales.
Jobs, schools, health, homes and transport are much more important to the Government and to most people living in rural areas. However, hunting has taken a lot of parliamentary time year after year, and it needed to be resolved.
The Hunting Act 2004 is a simple, clear piece of legislation. It will make the hunting with dogs of all wild mammals an offence, apart from some specific exemptions such as ratting and activities such as stalking and flushing out with no more than two dogs in limited circumstances, or the use of a dog below ground to protect game birds. The Act completely bans hare coursing.
The Government has sought throughout to find a less divisive way than the options of a total ban on the one hand or “no change” on the other – basing its approach on principle, evidence and dialogue. However, because the issue has been a matter of such hot debate year after year, it proved very difficult to find any common ground whatsoever. Nevertheless, the Government persevered with this approach right to the end.
The Government recognises that there are very strong views on both sides and that the issue is a matter of conscience. It has been subject to a free vote in Parliament for very many years. On each occasion when the issue has been voted upon (10 times in 10 years), Members of Parliament have voted in favour of a ban by a substantial majority.
The Act has now been given Royal Assent and will come into effect on 18 February 2005. It was not forced through by the Government. It was passed under the Parliament Acts, which provide for the will of the elected chamber to prevail when there is disagreement between the Houses of Parliament. Two years running, the House of Lords rejected the Bill despite knowing that it had been supported overwhelmingly by MPs. It was pro-hunt supporters in the House of Lords who have provoked the application of the Parliament Acts and made their application inevitable.
The Government offered a delay in commencement of the Act until July 2006, to give more time for people and businesses to adjust and to allow for the re-homing or humane dispersal of animals. It would also have allowed the public to express their views on the ban through the ballot box. However, the House of Lords adopted what the media have called the “kamikaze option”, and explicitly rejected this offer on two separate occasions.
The Government is satisfied that the Bill is fully compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Joint Committee on Human Rights did not suggest the Bill is incompatible with human rights as has been claimed in some quarters.
Around 7 out of 10 of the public oppose hunting. This includes a majority in rural areas. This has been fairly consistent for some years, although individual polls can show differing results.
The Government fully supports the right of peaceful protest, but condemns unlawful protest and intimidation. The Government accepts the right of the Countryside Alliance and others to challenge the Act through the Courts but is confident that the Act has a sound legal basis in all respects.
It is now time to begin to prepare for the implementation of the Act. The Government does not expect that significant numbers of people will find themselves out of work as a result of the Act. The Committee of Inquiry chaired by Lord Burns concluded that “Hunting, as an economic activity, is so small as to be almost invisible in terms of national aggregates”. Jobs related to hunting are few compared with other rural business sectors, such as the horse industry. The Government is grateful to the RSPCA for their offer to help with the re-homing or other care of dogs.
The Government has fulfilled its manifesto commitment to enable Parliament to resolve the issue of hunting with dogs in England and Wales.
Jobs, schools, health, homes and transport are much more important to the Government and to most people living in rural areas. However, hunting has taken a lot of parliamentary time year after year, and it needed to be resolved.
The Hunting Act 2004 is a simple, clear piece of legislation. It will make the hunting with dogs of all wild mammals an offence, apart from some specific exemptions such as ratting and activities such as stalking and flushing out with no more than two dogs in limited circumstances, or the use of a dog below ground to protect game birds. The Act completely bans hare coursing.
The Government has sought throughout to find a less divisive way than the options of a total ban on the one hand or “no change” on the other – basing its approach on principle, evidence and dialogue. However, because the issue has been a matter of such hot debate year after year, it proved very difficult to find any common ground whatsoever. Nevertheless, the Government persevered with this approach right to the end.
The Government recognises that there are very strong views on both sides and that the issue is a matter of conscience. It has been subject to a free vote in Parliament for very many years. On each occasion when the issue has been voted upon (10 times in 10 years), Members of Parliament have voted in favour of a ban by a substantial majority.
The Act has now been given Royal Assent and will come into effect on 18 February 2005. It was not forced through by the Government. It was passed under the Parliament Acts, which provide for the will of the elected chamber to prevail when there is disagreement between the Houses of Parliament. Two years running, the House of Lords rejected the Bill despite knowing that it had been supported overwhelmingly by MPs. It was pro-hunt supporters in the House of Lords who have provoked the application of the Parliament Acts and made their application inevitable.
The Government offered a delay in commencement of the Act until July 2006, to give more time for people and businesses to adjust and to allow for the re-homing or humane dispersal of animals. It would also have allowed the public to express their views on the ban through the ballot box. However, the House of Lords adopted what the media have called the “kamikaze option”, and explicitly rejected this offer on two separate occasions.
The Government is satisfied that the Bill is fully compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The Joint Committee on Human Rights did not suggest the Bill is incompatible with human rights as has been claimed in some quarters.
Around 7 out of 10 of the public oppose hunting. This includes a majority in rural areas. This has been fairly consistent for some years, although individual polls can show differing results.
The Government fully supports the right of peaceful protest, but condemns unlawful protest and intimidation. The Government accepts the right of the Countryside Alliance and others to challenge the Act through the Courts but is confident that the Act has a sound legal basis in all respects.
It is now time to begin to prepare for the implementation of the Act. The Government does not expect that significant numbers of people will find themselves out of work as a result of the Act. The Committee of Inquiry chaired by Lord Burns concluded that “Hunting, as an economic activity, is so small as to be almost invisible in terms of national aggregates”. Jobs related to hunting are few compared with other rural business sectors, such as the horse industry. The Government is grateful to the RSPCA for their offer to help with the re-homing or other care of dogs.
