UKIP on Fox Hunting.

barrymx5 · 03-12-2004, 03:29 PM

Why waste effort on past issues? There is too much to do! As far as the argument that UKIP should press for a referendum, we already know from polls that the vast majority favour the ban. The so called Countryside Alliance were found guilty of falsehood in their 59 percent claim. The last thing in the world we need is to foul our clean, honest image by association with an organisation which has a proven record of falshood and thuggery. I repeat - move on! We do not need to tear ourselves asunder on yet another issue which is a side-show. Yes we need a full manifesto but on real issues - particularly ones where our EU membership is a major factor.

cynic · 03-12-2004, 05:28 PM

Sorry, but this issue is not past by a long shot. This will be the 'clause 28' that will hang over Labour like a cloud. They dare not touch fishing at present but believe me they would if it didn't lose them a lot of votes. There is a huge difference between Fox Hunting and Bear Baiting. Fox Hunting still continues in Scotland and even more Foxes are being Killed than ever before, not just weak ones. In a sense Hunting fufills what would happen in the wild, and maintains the balance of nature. A lot of the countryside that you see and appreciate is kept that way because of the economics of various countryside sports, the alternative would be complete Prairie farming or creating a vast organisation of Bureaucracy and subsidy to maintain the Landscape. UKIP has a large constituency and Rural People are part of that. We certainly do not want to dismiss these People as the other Parties have done.

C_steam · 03-12-2004, 05:57 PM

Barry, I didn't mean we should have an active campaign one way or another, just that there needs to be a 'position' even if that position is that we would hold local referenda. (sorry - I'm living in fear of Nigel 'Spelling bee' Garage)

Someone is sure to ask the question and the 'we don't know, and don't particularly care as it is a past issue' response is not particularly helpful.

barrymx5 · 03-12-2004, 10:32 PM

OK so we may need something by way of reply if (but only if) Hunting is raised but there is no need for it to be in the manifesto. But the wording needs to be anodyne rather than upsetting either side (but particularly the majority opposed to hunting). There is little point in drafting here but something on the lines of:
The hunting issue has been decided and the will of the majority has prevailed. UKIP members were on both sides of the debate and as law abiding citizens will obey the law.
I do have trouble with this assumption that country dwellers are all pro hunting. Polls show this is not the case and even in deepest Somerset there is no strong feeling amongst most of my neighbours. Furthermore I dispute the presumption that hunting is an acceptable reflection of natural selection. Wildlife normally self-balances its numbers and remember foxes inter alia feed on rabbits, rats, beetles etc which are often regarded as undesirable. Furthermore stag hunters aim for the multi-point antler stags - usually the strongest and best for breeding.

The debate on animal testing is one where we can win points because the new EU regulations are requiring a huge amount of re-testing, even of common and traditional substances. In each case the 50/50 tests are employed which require deaths of test animals. This is an area where we can link the issue of animal welfare and the EU. Others include the long-distance transport of live animals and the EU rules, which are basically inhumane and insufficiently enforced. Intensive breeding has already been referred to above - and the UK is more humane in its treatment of sows with others in the EU fighting to keep the bad old intensive, cruel ways. This whole area is ripe for exploitation (positive meaning) by UKIP in a nation of animal lovers. We could be seen as working with RSPCA and other respected charities rather than the questionable Countryside Alliance.

C_steam · 03-12-2004, 10:36 PM

As a displaced somerset lad I agree that hunting is not such a big issue there. Further south, perhaps. Certainly in the east mids - home of many hunts - there is a strong pro-lobby.

cynic · 04-12-2004, 12:06 AM

Quote:

We could be seen as working with RSPCA and other respected charities rather than the questionable Countryside Alliance.

Sorry, we definitely disagree on this one. I was on the Countryside march in London and it is the RSPCA with it's propaganda that was questionable.

Quote:

I do have trouble with this assumption that country dwellers are all pro hunting.

True and the reverse applies to Urbanites being anti-hunting.
Insofar as animal welfare is concerned, re-opening all the Local Abattoirs that were closed by E.U. edict is one quick and easy solution.
You can be an animal lover, but you can also be a realist:
The animal 'rights' people who released all those mink a few years back caused untold devastation to the native wildlife.
Badgers do spread T.B. among cattle and their numbers should be controlled.
Animal Testing for medical reasons has saved peoples lives - Would I sacrifice a 'puppy' if it saved my child's life - Yes!
If you wear leather shoes why object to Fur which is raised specifically for that purpose. All those Eskimos can't be wrong.
People are too separated from what they buy and consume from the supermarket. Let them work on a Farm, see how hard it is, get paid below the minimum wage for working hours on end, and have to go and kill a chicken if they want to eat their next meal. Now there's a reality check I'd love to see these Champagne Socialists go through. What should be on UKIPs' agenda is New Labours Mugabe style treatment of UK Farmers and the Countryside; and 'Fair Trade' not just for the Third World but our own home grown Producers getting gouged by the Supermarket chains. This issue is far from over..................

barrymx5 · 04-12-2004, 01:23 PM

Cynic, I think the distance between us may well be reflected elsewhere in the UKIP membership and supports my original assertion that Hunting should be left out of the Manifesto to avoid splitting members on a non-core issue.
Three clarifications though:
1. There is animal testing and animal testing; the EU would increase it unnecessarily and furthermore the way that it is done eg without anaesesthesia, with few inspectors etc. UKIP could pledge to improve this
2. There is no proof of a link between bovine TB and badgers. Massive systamatic culls of badgers in selected areas have not proved the allegation. And farmers flout the law by killing badgers in protected areas and dumping them on roads as road kills.
3. British farmers are generally (but unfortunately not always) more caring of their livestock than their Continental competition and this needs to be stressed. I am with you all the way on local abatoirs. The recent attacks by trading standards officers on butchers informing customers of which local farms their meat comes from needs to be fought. Trading standards were as usual claiming an EU directive as their justification.

doc_cruel · 04-12-2004, 04:31 PM

I say we should stand our ground on Fox hunting. It's a sick nasty sport - how can anyone defend grown men dressing up, saddling up and riding round the countryside getting off on seeing poor foxes getting ripped to death by a pack of trained hunting dogs?!

The people of Britian would respect us if we stood up for whats right - the countryside folk are a bunch of CAP sucking Europhiles anyhow.

cynic · 04-12-2004, 10:03 PM

This is a Forum that anyone can join, so Loony Left Socialists to Animal Rights extremists can post a comment. Whereas 'barrymx5' has reasoning, 'doc_cruel' speaks the language of New Labour, so perhaps he is in the wrong forum? UKIP at its' core is a Libertarian Organisation, so look the word up and then decide whether or not you believe in those values. If not there are a zillion other parties and organisations who will represent your point of view, and for whom you can vote for. Foxes will always have to be controlled by some method, Hunting is for me the favoured option, it is tried and tested and works. It is also, compared to all the other methods on offer, 'an organic way' of doing it. The C.A.P. does no favours to Farmers or the Countryside, so to try and combine Class Prejudice with some weird sexual innuendo and add a touch of Cuddly Animal syndrome in an emotional mix cuts no ice. You have a choice on how you want to live your life. It can be a sanitised Health and Safety World with the State as your Eternal Parent. You may want that choice, but others do not, that is why this is so very important and basic to what UKIP stands for.

doc_cruel · 05-12-2004, 12:28 AM

Cynic - I's have to disagree with you there on 2 points;
Firstly I dont try to promise everything to everyone but deliver nothing.... therefore for I'm certainly not new labour! I know what I believe and why and have choosen my sides accordingly :wink:

Secondly no matter whatever your beliefs civilised society needs rules and laws; pests do need to be controlled yes but there's a definate distinction between controlling a pest and grown men who should know better getting pleasure out of a defenceless animal's pain.

Scotland's example shows that hunting has no real effect on fox population and there are better more 'humane' ways to maintain the status-quo of the countryside without the need for packs of hunting dogs and toffs on horses!

03-12-2004, 05:28 PM	#22 (permalink)
cynic Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 127	Country vs City Sorry, but this issue is not past by a long shot. This will be the 'clause 28' that will hang over Labour like a cloud. They dare not touch fishing at present but believe me they would if it didn't lose them a lot of votes. There is a huge difference between Fox Hunting and Bear Baiting. Fox Hunting still continues in Scotland and even more Foxes are being Killed than ever before, not just weak ones. In a sense Hunting fufills what would happen in the wild, and maintains the balance of nature. A lot of the countryside that you see and appreciate is kept that way because of the economics of various countryside sports, the alternative would be complete Prairie farming or creating a vast organisation of Bureaucracy and subsidy to maintain the Landscape. UKIP has a large constituency and Rural People are part of that. We certainly do not want to dismiss these People as the other Parties have done.

04-12-2004, 10:03 PM	#29 (permalink)
cynic Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 127	Freedom This is a Forum that anyone can join, so Loony Left Socialists to Animal Rights extremists can post a comment. Whereas 'barrymx5' has reasoning, 'doc_cruel' speaks the language of New Labour, so perhaps he is in the wrong forum? UKIP at its' core is a Libertarian Organisation, so look the word up and then decide whether or not you believe in those values. If not there are a zillion other parties and organisations who will represent your point of view, and for whom you can vote for. Foxes will always have to be controlled by some method, Hunting is for me the favoured option, it is tried and tested and works. It is also, compared to all the other methods on offer, 'an organic way' of doing it. The C.A.P. does no favours to Farmers or the Countryside, so to try and combine Class Prejudice with some weird sexual innuendo and add a touch of Cuddly Animal syndrome in an emotional mix cuts no ice. You have a choice on how you want to live your life. It can be a sanitised Health and Safety World with the State as your Eternal Parent. You may want that choice, but others do not, that is why this is so very important and basic to what UKIP stands for.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-12-2004, 03:29 PM	#21 (permalink)
barrymx5 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Somerset Posts: 20	Why waste effort on past issues? There is too much to do! As far as the argument that UKIP should press for a referendum, we already know from polls that the vast majority favour the ban. The so called Countryside Alliance were found guilty of falsehood in their 59 percent claim. The last thing in the world we need is to foul our clean, honest image by association with an organisation which has a proven record of falshood and thuggery. I repeat - move on! We do not need to tear ourselves asunder on yet another issue which is a side-show. Yes we need a full manifesto but on real issues - particularly ones where our EU membership is a major factor.

03-12-2004, 05:57 PM	#23 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,509	Barry, I didn't mean we should have an active campaign one way or another, just that there needs to be a 'position' even if that position is that we would hold local referenda. (sorry - I'm living in fear of Nigel 'Spelling bee' Garage) Someone is sure to ask the question and the 'we don't know, and don't particularly care as it is a past issue' response is not particularly helpful.

03-12-2004, 10:32 PM	#24 (permalink)
barrymx5 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Somerset Posts: 20	OK so we may need something by way of reply if (but only if) Hunting is raised but there is no need for it to be in the manifesto. But the wording needs to be anodyne rather than upsetting either side (but particularly the majority opposed to hunting). There is little point in drafting here but something on the lines of: The hunting issue has been decided and the will of the majority has prevailed. UKIP members were on both sides of the debate and as law abiding citizens will obey the law. I do have trouble with this assumption that country dwellers are all pro hunting. Polls show this is not the case and even in deepest Somerset there is no strong feeling amongst most of my neighbours. Furthermore I dispute the presumption that hunting is an acceptable reflection of natural selection. Wildlife normally self-balances its numbers and remember foxes inter alia feed on rabbits, rats, beetles etc which are often regarded as undesirable. Furthermore stag hunters aim for the multi-point antler stags - usually the strongest and best for breeding. The debate on animal testing is one where we can win points because the new EU regulations are requiring a huge amount of re-testing, even of common and traditional substances. In each case the 50/50 tests are employed which require deaths of test animals. This is an area where we can link the issue of animal welfare and the EU. Others include the long-distance transport of live animals and the EU rules, which are basically inhumane and insufficiently enforced. Intensive breeding has already been referred to above - and the UK is more humane in its treatment of sows with others in the EU fighting to keep the bad old intensive, cruel ways. This whole area is ripe for exploitation (positive meaning) by UKIP in a nation of animal lovers. We could be seen as working with RSPCA and other respected charities rather than the questionable Countryside Alliance.

03-12-2004, 10:36 PM	#25 (permalink)
C_steam Super Moderator Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Paddling up 5hit creek..... Posts: 7,509	As a displaced somerset lad I agree that hunting is not such a big issue there. Further south, perhaps. Certainly in the east mids - home of many hunts - there is a strong pro-lobby.

04-12-2004, 01:23 PM	#27 (permalink)
barrymx5 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Somerset Posts: 20	Cynic, I think the distance between us may well be reflected elsewhere in the UKIP membership and supports my original assertion that Hunting should be left out of the Manifesto to avoid splitting members on a non-core issue. Three clarifications though: 1. There is animal testing and animal testing; the EU would increase it unnecessarily and furthermore the way that it is done eg without anaesesthesia, with few inspectors etc. UKIP could pledge to improve this 2. There is no proof of a link between bovine TB and badgers. Massive systamatic culls of badgers in selected areas have not proved the allegation. And farmers flout the law by killing badgers in protected areas and dumping them on roads as road kills. 3. British farmers are generally (but unfortunately not always) more caring of their livestock than their Continental competition and this needs to be stressed. I am with you all the way on local abatoirs. The recent attacks by trading standards officers on butchers informing customers of which local farms their meat comes from needs to be fought. Trading standards were as usual claiming an EU directive as their justification.

04-12-2004, 04:31 PM	#28 (permalink)
doc_cruel Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 213	I say we should stand our ground on Fox hunting. It's a sick nasty sport - how can anyone defend grown men dressing up, saddling up and riding round the countryside getting off on seeing poor foxes getting ripped to death by a pack of trained hunting dogs?! The people of Britian would respect us if we stood up for whats right - the countryside folk are a bunch of CAP sucking Europhiles anyhow.

05-12-2004, 12:28 AM	#30 (permalink)
doc_cruel Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 213	Cynic - I's have to disagree with you there on 2 points; Firstly I dont try to promise everything to everyone but deliver nothing.... therefore for I'm certainly not new labour! I know what I believe and why and have choosen my sides accordingly :wink: Secondly no matter whatever your beliefs civilised society needs rules and laws; pests do need to be controlled yes but there's a definate distinction between controlling a pest and grown men who should know better getting pleasure out of a defenceless animal's pain. Scotland's example shows that hunting has no real effect on fox population and there are better more 'humane' ways to maintain the status-quo of the countryside without the need for packs of hunting dogs and toffs on horses!