HeWasGeeBee
Well-Known Member
The antis are seriously divided.
Indeed they are : prominent anti:::
"Chris Gale
Many of the loopholes in the Act were put their at the behest of senior Labour politcians with links to the shooting lobby. They made sure that terrier work etc would be unaffected. Gary glosses over the fact that the party disgracefully actively supports bloodsports of the shooting lobby. Thats one reason why the Act is so weak and they should make a commitment to tighten it and stop supporting bloodsports.
Yesterday at 18:35 · Report"
Gary Hills:
"One of those amendments was snuck in, without their being time to challenge it properly or see the reality it could cause. That was to show when a hunt was hunting or not. The law stands that a hunt can not give chase to a fox, and this applies if they flush out a fox. However the pro hunt Lords made the wording that if a fox is flush out then it must be shot.
Its been contentious ever since, now nobody on the animal side supports it, but we have a dilemma. The only way to change it is with another amendment. However the Pro hunting Lords vowed to block any attempt to improve the wording of the law. So only the next stage of Lords reform will remove their ability to harm any improvements.... Read more"
"for decades Labour MPs argued for a ban on hunting, the wording is not the fault of the Labour Party...thats simply not the case. The law and its wording on the point that has been contentious is because of pro hunting Lords...and the Tory Party...the Labour MPs were just as upset as all of us that they snuck the amendment through."