Abolition of Deer Hunting (Hansard, 19 June 1990)

§ Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North)
I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit the hunting and killing of deer with dogs; and for connected purposes. My purpose in introducing the—[Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Will hon. Members wishing to leave the Chamber please do so quietly?

§ Mr. Corbyn
I hope that those hon. Members who have left the Chamber already have not gone hunting as it is the close season.
The purpose of the Bill is to strengthen animal protection legislation. The need to do that arises because the Protection of Animals Act 1911 and the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912 excluded cruelty to wild animals. Because of that, blood sports have been able to continue ever since, although legislation has been introduced to prohibit the hunting of some wild animals, such as the otter, and to ban badger-baiting. The badger has been the subject of a Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks), which seeks to protect the badger's habitat and environment.
The purpose of my Bill is simply to remove the legal nicety which, at the moment, allows the hunting and killing of deer with dogs, which I believe to be a wanton cruelty. The Bill would not prohibit the culling of deer to restrict the deer population and so to protect the deer's habitat, and it would not prohibit the shooting of deer, but it would prohibit the extremely cruel practice of hunting deer with dogs.
For the benefit of those who do not know much about the matter, I should explain that many people have written to hon. Members asking why we allow this barbarism to continue. Let me give some examples of what happens. The hunters observe deer as they graze in their normal habitat—on Exmoor or in the New forest, for example. They pick out a particular deer, stag or hind to be hunted later that day or on the following day. The animals are then pursued throughout the day by packs of hounds with people following them. The packs of hounds have more stamina than the deer and chase them to exhaustion point. The deer suffer the most appalling stress during the chase, sometimes running up to 25 miles in one day, and the chase can continue for as long as seven hours.
As it nears exhaustion, the deer may try to take refuge behind a gorse bush, in a tree-covered area or even in a river. But they will have been spotted by still more observers of the hunt. A new scent will be started, and the deer pursued once again. Once the deer are totally exhausted and on the point of collapse, they are supposed to be killed with the aid of a gun from the hunt, but often the hunt is so far behind that the person who is supposed to kill the deer with the gun is not available and the hounds tear the deer apart. It is barbarism of the first order.
There is nothing sporting about the practice and there is nothing in the great traditions of the countryside that can defend it. What is involved here is blood lust. That is why the practice is opposed by an overwhelming majority of people—not just by the general public but by many of those who live in the areas where hunting takes place. I grew up in an area where fox and otter hunting were rife. Those who engaged in these so-called sports claimed to 805 have the overwhelming support of the rural community. Their claim was not true when I was growing up any more than it is true today. It is claimed, too, that hunting is part of the great tradition of our countryside and should be protected. I cannot accept that such cruelty is one of our countryside traditions and I cannot accept that we should allow it to continue.
Pressure was brought to bear to ensure that the hunting of deer with dogs was abolished in Scotland, and the Deer (Scotland) Act 1959 prevented such hunting. Now only stalking and shooting are allowed in Scotland and they are at least humanely practised. But the appalling barbarism with which my Bill deals continues to exist in England —in the south and south-west particularly.
There is considerable support for my Bill. The last early-day motion on the abolition of deer hunting was signed by more than 200 hon. Members. Opinion polls show that 81 per cent. of the public support calls for the abolition of deer hunting and the protection of deer from such cruelty. Answers to the converse question, when asked by opinion polls, show that only 4 per cent. of the population support the continuation of deer hunting.
More to the point, perhaps, it is claimed that farmers and those who live in the Exmoor area and other areas in which deer hunting takes place support deer hunting. That is simply not the case. More than half of farmers in Exmoor disapprove of deer hunting, because they do not like the cruelty involved and because of the damage that it does to hedgerows, to fencing, to their land, to their crops and to other animals that are pursued by hounds in pursuit of deer. It is simply not true to say that there is overwhelming support for deer hunting.
It has been said to me that I have no right to speak on the subject because I represent an inner-urban constituency. My constituency has almost the smallest amount of open space of any constituency in the country. Many people in my constituency enjoy the opportunity of visiting the countryside. Perhaps many would enjoy living in the 806 countryside. They have deep concern for the countryside and therefore consider it right that they should be able to express their opinions on that barbarism, just as people who live in rural areas or hon. Members who represent rural areas have every right to comment on what goes on in urban areas. They have just as much right as those who represent rural areas to comment on these matters.
There is a growing feeling around the country that something must be done about cruelty to animals. The banning of otter hunting was achieved after a tremendous campaign. I hope that my hon. Friend's Bill to protect badger setts, which goes on the back of legislation that was introduced by other hon. Members to protect badgers from badger-baiting and has been successful, is passed by the House.
This Bill is yet another step forward in making this country's legislation on animals slightly more humane and slightly more civilised. I believe that it has overwhelming support throughout the country. Hunting with dogs and the vile killing for bloodlust in the name of sport should not be allowed in this country. The House must represent the views of the vast majority of people throughout the country and pass this legislation to remove this so-called sport, which I believe to be an obscenity, from legal sanction in this country and to abolish it so that we may have fair legislation that guarantees the safety of animals and prohibits and outlaws the cruelty to animals that is part of so-called sport.