With Labour under pressure to act on its pledge to ban trail hunting, the Countryside Alliance is stepping up its campaigning, while urging hunts to be open and proactive to help shift public perception, says Tim Bonner. 

It seems absurd, but amongst the fraught Westminster debates on foreign affairs, welfare cuts and trade tariffs in recent months there have also been a steady stream of parliamentary questions from MPs about when the government will bring forward legislation on hunting. Labour was elected with a manifesto commitment to “ban trail hunting” and however much Ministers might not enjoy defending its skewed rural priorities they are now locked into a battle with the anti-hunting movement over when the government will deliver that promise.

In April, the Agriculture Minister, Daniel Zeichner, hinted at a consultation later this year, but subsequent answers from Defra Ministers have not repeated that suggestion and the last substantial response said that: “work to bring [a trail hunting ban] forward is at a very early stage and there is not yet an agreed timetable”. We are, therefore, no wiser as to when we might see the government’s proposals.

Yet, however out of touch with voters’ priorities it may seem, there is an argument for throwing hunting to the howling pack of Labour MPs. Just as in the 2000s, there will be political advisors suggesting that hunting is the ‘red meat’ that the government needs to feed its rebellious backbenchers who have just rejected welfare reforms and seem to be looking for the next fight with Number 10. It was only after six years in Downing Street that Tony Blair reached the same place. He too was bound by a manifesto commitment on hunting which was to “resolve the issue”. Faced with a rebellion over legislation on foundation hospitals and huge concern on his backbenches about the invasion of Iraq he finally folded and enabled the use of the Parliament Acts to enact a complete ban on hunting.

It is generally forgotten that the Blair government’s original proposal was to license hunting, not ban it. The licensing bill was amended to a complete ban by Labour backbenchers who were given a free vote. This precedent may also become very relevant in the coming months and years.

The government has suggested what its approach might be when it finds time to legislate. It has briefed newspapers that it intends to add recklessness to the offence of illegal hunting, ban the use of animal-based scents and increase fines for offenders. As unnecessary and unjustified as these moves would be they are certainly not enough for the animal rights movement and their friends on the left of the Labour party. They have already laid out their agenda and want as a minimum to remove the exemptions to the current Act, impose custodial sentences, apply vicarious liability to landowners, extend the statutory time limit for prosecuting hunting offences and to make corporate bodies more accountable for hunting offences. Essentially, they will not be happy until the risks of taking a pack of hounds into the countryside is so great that few will feel able to do so.

This has nothing to do with animal welfare or legislation: it is a return to the fundamental aim of the antihunting movement which is to eradicate hunts and the hunting community.

Ministers may be able to point to the ‘limited’ commitment in the Labour manifesto and argue that their proposals are merely about enforcing the legislation passed in 2004, but there will be plenty on their backbenches who see things differently. Just as in the 2000s, once the government has opened the Pandora’s Box of hunting legislation it may not have much say in where that legislation ends up.

So what can we do to counter this threat? The Alliance will continue to meet and lobby MPs and warn Ministers of the perils of launching a culture war in the countryside, either by design or default, but this is not a battle that can be won in Westminster alone. The reason that trail hunting is on the political agenda at all is because there is a perception amongst the public, the police and politicians that not all hunts are operating legally. The fact that the Hunting Act is an appalling piece of legislation that should never have been passed in the first place is sadly irrelevant, and arguments about the important contributions that hunts make to the rural community will not be heard until they are perceived to be operating legitimately.

At least part of the answer about how we change that perception came during a recent event looking at public trust in the welfare of horses used in sport. David Yelland, ex-Sun editor and PR guru got right to the heart of the issue. “The best PR in the world” he said, “is to do the right thing.” He advised that if you want to turn public perception from negative to positive “you do that by working very hard… and not going into denial.”

That is a lesson we all need to heed, and which needs to be urgently applied to hunting activity as we face the inevitable implementation of the Labour manifesto commitment. For reasons that are understandable, most obviously the inevitable spurious allegations from a small number of activists, hunts have not always been open about how they operate, or keen to promote trail hunting since the Hunting Act came into force in 2005.

If we are to follow David Yelland’s prescription to create positive public perception, then that must change. Hunts need to be open about their trail hunting and invite the public and politicians into the hunting field to show clearly and unequivocally that they are operating legally.