Nick Herbert, chairman of the Countryside Alliance, delivered a powerful speech in the House of Lords on Tuesday (19 May 2026) during a debate on the King’s Speech. In it, Lord Herbert criticised the government’s ongoing assault on rural communities, drawing attention to the widespread anger in opposition to harmful policies impacting racing, farming, trail hunting and shooting.

A full copy of the speech can be found below.

My Lords

I draw attention to my entries in the Register of Members’ Interests as Chairman of the Countryside Alliance and related positions, and I add my congratulations to the noble Lords Hobby and Blackwater on their fine maiden speeches.

On Thursday the Gambling Commission will decide whether to approve the rollout of affordability checks on online betting.

When the previous government announced these checks three years ago ministers said they should be “totally frictionless”. The pilots have not been.

Immense damage to horse racing has already been done — and to what effect? Bettors resent intrusive checks and are driven to the black market. Racing loses revenue — an estimated £250 million over five years — and so in turn does the Treasury. And while I appreciate the potential harm of other forms of gambling, betting on racing is simply not in the same league: the risks are akin to that of playing national lottery scratchcards. Should these be restricted, too?

There has been no proper evaluation of the affordability pilots and it appears that the checks will be green-lighted with no Parliamentary debate or scrutiny.

Affordability checks are directly contrary to the Government’s declared support for racing. So I urge the Culture Secretary to step in and revisit an ill-targeted policy which, after all, wasn’t the government’s in the first place.

When racing is damaged so too is the rural economy. And I wonder if the Government understands how rural communities feel about successive policies which have been directed at them.

First we had affordability checks. Then we had the family farm tax which had to be partially reversed after a year of protest. Then, out of the blue, we had an extraordinary plan in the Land Use Framework to license game shooting. Now we have a proposed ban on trail hunting.

Tony Blair’s government faced enough opposition when it forced through the hunting ban, but it wasn’t so unwise as to attack racing — the nation’s second most popular spectator sport — farming and shooting at the same time. When Members of Parliament so obviously face a mortal challenge from Reform UK these unforced assaults on rural voters aren’t just bad policy: they’re inexplicably bad politics, too.

Twenty years ago ministers justified the abolition of hunting by telling people they could hunt trails instead. Now this government wants to ban this activity, too, on the grounds that it risks the pursuit of animals — but this is already a criminal offence. Outlawing the following of an artificial trail is akin to banning cars to prevent speeding. It’s illiberal, disproportionate, and completely out of step with voter priorities.

After the local elections there’s much talk of a reset, and I hesitate to intrude on the bloodsport of leadership challenge.

But I do offer this suggestion for future policy. There are enough real problems in the country — and the countryside — to address without creating new ones. The job of DCMS is to back sport, not to undermine it. The job of DEFRA is to support rural communities, not to attack them. And the job of government is surely to improve people’s lives, not to behave like new puritans, telling everyone what they can and cannot do. The Gracious Speech committed the Government to promote the British values of tolerance and respect for difference. That respect should extend to rural communities, and I would suggest that freedom is foremost amongst British values, too.