On Monday (30 June), MPs debated a ban on grouse shooting. As the country and the world face chaos and crisis the obvious first question is ‘have they really got nothing more important to discuss?’, but in fairness neither the government, nor MPs were responsible for the subject matter.

That dubious honour lies with BBC presenter Chris Packham with the support of his anti-shooting group, Wild Justice. Mr Packham created a petition using parliament’s online process which delivers a debate on any issue in return for 100,000 clicks and promoted it for months on end. This is the third time Wild Justice has generated such a debate, which says a lot about its narrow and partial agenda, but this time it was sure the response would be different.

In the last two debates, under the last Conservative government, MP after MP had lined up to highlight the economic, environmental and social benefits of grouse shooting which are so vital to many marginal rural communities. This time Wild Justice was sure that the seismic political change delivered by last year’s general election would mean a sea change in support for its agenda. Chris Packham excitedly filmed himself for social media outside parliament before joining the public gallery in Westminster Hall, but his mood soon changed.

After the motion was moved by Petitions Committee member John Lamont (Con, Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) who presented a balanced overview having been briefed by the Alliance and colleagues as well as anti-shooting organisations, Rishi Sunak (Con, Richmond) initiated an impassioned and detailed defence “because grouse shooting is fundamental to hard-working people in constituencies such as mine”. Soon Chris Packham had his head in his hands and things only got worse for him.

Sam Rushworth (Lab, Bishop Auckland) talked about the environmental and social benefits derived from grouse shooting in his constituency. He said he was there to speak for “gamekeepers, those who run gun shops, provide hospitality during shoots, maintain dry stone walls, look after the lodges and train dogs, and the young people for whom being a beater is a great way to earn a seasonal wage” and therefore opposed the motion.

Sarah Dyke (Lib Dem, Glastonbury and Somerton), Robbie Moore (Con, Keighley and Ilkley), Greg Smith (Con, Mid Buckinghamshire), Angus MacDonald (Lib Dem, Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire), Kevin Hollinrake (Con, Thirsk and Malton), Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford) and others all added their opposition whilst one solitary MP, Olivia Blake (Lab, Sheffield Hallam) spoke in support of a ban. It was therefore no surprise when Agriculture Minister Daniel Zeichner responded on behalf of the government by confirming that “the Government have no plans to ban grouse shooting”. Chris Packham left the debate very obviously dissatisfied and noticeably has not said a word about grouse shooting since.

Whilst the Alliance works every day in parliament and across the country to defend our way of life and activities like grouse shooting, we do not act alone. The engagement of gamekeepers and local people with MPs in their constituencies, often through brilliant Regional Moorland Groups, has had a fundamental impact on political attitudes.

The cultural change engendered by the zero-tolerance approach to raptor persecution by the National Gamekeepers Organisation, BASC and other shooting organisations has seen raptor numbers, including hen harriers, grow and changed the debate around illegal killing of birds of prey. The science produced by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust has made unarguable the environmental benefits of grouse moor management. The result of all our work was plain to see on Monday, even if some in attendance did not welcome what unfolded in front of their eyes.