HL Deb 07 December 2004 vol 667 cc732-4

2.51 p.m.

Lord Willoughby de Broke asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the statement by Peter Bradley MP, the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Minister for Rural Affairs, in the Sunday Telegraph of 21 November, that the Hunting Act 2004 was "not just about animal welfare and personal freedom; it was class war" represents the view of the Government.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty)

My Lords, the article is clearly not a statement of government policy. Even so, it does make some interesting and telling points.

Lord Willoughby de Broke

My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for that clear reply. Did the Minister for Rural Affairs, Mr Alun Michael, see and clear the article written by his Parliamentary Private Secretary in the Sunday Telegraph before it was submitted for publication? If he did not, should Mr Bradley resign for making government policy on the hoof? However, if he did see it, perhaps Mr Michael should consider his position as he clearly misled Parliament on the purposes of the Hunting Act. It was supposed to be an animal welfare measure, although according to Mr Bradley's article was anything but that; it was about class war.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, Peter Bradley did not claim that his article was government policy. There is no requirement for a PPS to have the agreement of their Minister before they give an opinion—as is the case for any Member of Parliament. Mr Michael was aware of the article, but there was no question of him clearing it. He has made his position clear.

The noble Lord would be well advised actually to read the article rather than rely on the headline in the Sunday Telegraph. The article makes it clear that it was not the Labour Party, the House of Commons or anti-hunters declaring class war. As I have always said, we do not care whether it is a toff or a tinker who hunts cruelly in our countryside. "Class war" was the declaration made by some elements in this House and the hunting fraternity who decided to confront the House of Commons, the democratically elected Chamber, and threaten civil disobedience in the countryside.

Baroness Gale

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that on 25 November the Countryside Alliance held a demonstration outside a Cardiff hotel where a Labour Party event was taking place? Many people entering the event had their clothes ruined as the demonstrators threw eggs at them. Homophobic taunts were hurled at Chris Bryant, the Member of Parliament for Rhondda, who was threatened with being torn limb from limb if he went into the event. A woman police officer was subjected to racist remarks and four policemen were injured.

Does my noble friend condemn the actions of the Countryside Alliance supporters, who seem to have declared war, if not class war, on law-abiding citizens and on the police force?

Lord Whitty

Absolutely, my Lords. I condemn utterly those who organised and participated in the disruption of that event. It is a disgrace.

Lord Tebbit

My Lords, would the Minister care to invite the view of the Leader of the House of Commons on direct criminal action in support of a political objective?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, the Leader of the House of Commons has made his position clear, but we are talking about threats and violence. We are not talking about demonstrations, but about direct violence and damage caused by citizens who happen to support a particular view in the hunting debate. That is what I deplore.

Lord Dixon-Smith

My Lords, to discuss opposing points of view is like discussing chickens and eggs. However, it is a fact that for a very long time, and certainly for all my lifetime, politicians and governments have sought to diminish the issue of class warfare. Does the Minister agree that, as published, the remarks made by his honourable friend in the other place, however much they might represent only an undercurrent in the thinking of many Members of that House, are inappropriate in the first half of the 21st century, although they might have been appropriate during the first half of the 20th century?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I have made it absolutely clear that I do not accept that description of the article. I have also made it clear that some, both in this House and elsewhere, worry about the class war only when they think they are losing it. However, hunting has never been about class war. It has been about cruelty—and that was the decision taken by the House of Commons.

Lord Snape

My Lords—

Baroness Mallalieu

My Lords—

Noble Lords

Baroness Mallalieu!

Baroness Mallalieu

My Lords, does my noble friend accept that the classes of people who are most likely to be hit first and hardest by this legislation are individuals and small businesses in areas that are already deprived, such as Exmoor? What do the Government propose to do to help local authorities in those areas who, even now, are setting up disaster funds to help mitigate the effects of what, on Defra's own figures, will be annually for Exmoor a £9.5 million deficiency in the economy?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, I accept that some people—relatively few—in some parts of the country will be adversely affected by the ban. But I am astonished by my noble friend and other colleagues who support her. The Government came to this House and asked for a delay which would have mitigated some of these effects. Instead, despite my clear advice that this would be the only issue decided by its vote, this House decided to adopt what I would call a kamikaze tactic—although perhaps that is unfair because the Japanese never aimed at their own side.

Lord Snape

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that Mr Peter Bradley, the politician famously responsible for the quotation in the Sunday Telegraph, is described in the Times Guide to the House of Commons as the chairman or director of a Westminster-based public relations company? Would it reassure noble Lords opposite if I tell my noble friend that, in my experience, such people are rarely to be found at the forefront of the barricades at the time of the revolution?

Lord Whitty

My Lords, clearly my noble friend has more experience of revolutions than I do. However, in my limited experience, he is absolutely right.

Lord Mackie of Benshie

My Lords, would the noble Lord care to reflect on his statement that the Hunting Act was about cruelty? All the evidence suggests that it is crueller to shoot foxes than it is to kill them with hounds.

Lord Whitty

My Lords, that was a matter of considerable debate during the passage of the Bill. It was not the view taken by the majority in the House of Commons and it is not the view I take. I think that there are serious issues of cruelty relating to hunting with hounds. That is the view of the majority of the elected House and is actually the view of the majority in the country.