The government are trying to sneak fox hunting in through the back door
This is not about hunting for pest control. It's about hunting for fun
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.There will be much debate over the next week as to what the words 'flushing to guns' actually mean. What's the difference between 40 hounds chasing a fox or two? Is it a good thing or a bad thing?
It's actually quite simple. They are basically sneaking hunting in through the back door. By amending the Hunting Act like this, the government are deliberately and cynically making it easier for hunts to chase and kill foxes, and harder for them to be convicted when they break the law. This is not about hunting foxes for pest control. It's about hunting foxes for fun.
David Cameron pledged to hold a free vote on bringing back hunting but clearly they know they couldn't win. So now they are using deception to fool the public.
Please don't also be fooled by complaints that the Hunting Act doesn't work, or 'isn't a fair law'. Or even 'that it actually has worsened animal welfare'. Tosh. There have been over 400 convictions under the Hunting Act so it is clearly working, and to suggest that a law that stops mammals being ripped apart by a pack of dogs is somehow worsening animal welfare is another cynical attempt to convince the public - and gullible MPs - that something needed to change. The only thing that needed to change was the hunts who continually flout the law, and are now trying to make it easier for them to do so.
What the government is proposing will make the law in England the same as it is in Scotland. They are allowed to use a full pack of hounds to flush to guns, which means in theory they can use the dogs to chase a fox out of cover so it can be shot. But just a few months ago the League Against Cruel Sports in Scotland filmed half of the Scottish hunts hunting for foxes exactly as they were before it was illegal - and not a gun was in sight! This is what will happen in England. The hunts don't want to shoot the foxes, they want to chase them and see them ripped apart by hounds.
Eight out of ten people in this country want hunting to remain illegal. By introducing an amendment to the law, the government are laughing in their faces. MPs voting on this need to understand that the vast majority of their constituents are against bringing back hunting, so we expect them to vote accordingly.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments