Coffee House

PMQs: Lib Dems have thwarted changes to fox hunting law

26 March 2014

1:49 PM

26 March 2014

1:49 PM

Ed Miliband started strongly at PMQs today. He seized on Scottish and Southern’s announcement that they’ll freeze energy prices as a justification of his most popular policy, the energy price freeze. He mockingly asked Cameron if he still thought the idea was unworkable and a Communist plot.


But Cameron was determined not to lose the momentum that the Budget has given the Tories and just bulldozed past Miliband’s questions. Then, when Miliband moved onto the cost of living, Cameron seized the chance to rattle off a list of the coalition’s most popular policies. At the end of their exchanges, Cameron had matched—if not bettered—Miliband on what are meant to be Labour’s two strongest areas.

Unlike most other weeks, Cameron did not ease up after his exchanges with the Labour leader. He got the best joke of the session off in reply to a Stephen Pound question about that beer and bingo ad, cracking that Miliband enjoys bingo as ‘it’s the only time he ever gets close to Number 10’.

The news of the session, though, came towards the end when Cameron said that because of Lib Dem opposition there would not be changes to the rules surrounding fox hunting in upland areas. Sadly, it appears that the fox hunting ban—one of the most illiberal pieces of legislation in recent times—will not be repealed any time soon. ​

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.

Show comments
  • Phil Child

    “Sadly, it appears that the fox hunting ban—one of the most illiberal pieces of legislation in recent times—will not be repealed any time soon. ​”

    You be hunted down and ripped to bit and lets see how sadly you feel …prat..

  • chiefwhippet

    One of the best things the Lib Dems have done so far. The nasty party has been prevented from being its nasty self for once. Hurrah!

  • Greenslime

    Milliband seems too stupid to understand that there is a world of difference between government pressure and consumers voting with their feet to encourage power companies to rethink their pricing policies versus government legislating price controls. The fact that he does not recognise this very unsubtle difference shows what a petty little potential dictator we have seeking power. That sort of pricing control happens in Venezuela and look what a cluster’ that country is.

  • Pip

    LibLabCon have proven themselves all unfit to Govern and shown also that many should be in jail. I do wonder how many times certain types of people have to be lied to before they stop believing the deceit.

    • HookesLaw

      There is no such thing as liblabcon… so no they haven’t and no they shouldn’t – since such an amorphous group do not exist.
      You are hysterical. And a nutjob.

      • Gazcon

        Perhaps you don’t realise that LibLabCon is shorthand for the three established political parties that have taken it in turns to rule in recent generations, each betraying their core vote in so doing, not to mention the country as a whole.

        Perhaps you would prefer us to talk of the three-headed Milicleggeron? Once thought a creature of legend, the three heads are only distinguishable by the colour of neck tie worn underneath them.

        • HookesLaw

          I realise it is a cheap gimmick to justify nutjob hysteria.

      • saffrin

        With the differences between those parties being minimal, LibLabCon is most appropriate.
        Big changes are required if we are to improve our lot and the little tweak here and there the LibLabCon’s offer isn’t going to do it.

        • HookesLaw

          There are not minimal diferences. Stop pretending.

      • Pip

        “I do wonder how many times certain types of people have to be lied to before they stop believing the deceit”
        Your reply answered the question posed, most eloquently and obviously in your case the answer is ‘too any times’.

  • MalcolmRedfellow

    How, in Bingo, do you get “close to No. 10”? Is it proximity on the board? Or is it a fail like the Chief Whip and the Chancellor’s houses?

    • HookesLaw

      Are you a regular at the Empire Glasgow?

  • James Allen

    Yeh right…. why not put it to a vote and see what happens? Lib Dems are a convenient fig-leaf. Cameron doesn’t want the negative headlines in Guardian and Times….

    • telemachus

      None of this has import
      The westminster village abetted by the right wing press have an agenda that sees Labour on the ropes
      Forget what Westminster hacks think about who won the cost of living ding dong
      The voters know just how far the pound in their pocket is going
      Or how less far it goes now as compared to when Gordon demitted office

      • Hello

        “The westminster village abetted by the right wing press have an agenda that sees Labour on the ropes”

        You mean that Miliband decided to try a high risk strategy and lost? He had the arrogance and stupidity to think he was cleverer than everyone else. You don’t want people like that in positions of power, the world is too fragile and they just screw up.

        He’s the sort of chap that accidentally starts wars, and then loses them because he still doesn’t get what’s happening.

      • saffrin

        I doubt many if any will hold this Government responsible for the cost of living crisis when they all know it’s the consequences of your party’s incompetence while in office.

      • Colonel Mustard

        Now here is one lefty whose writing I have a little time for:-

        He’s not a tribalist bigot wedded to the Big Lie, the whole Big Lie and nothing but the Big Lie like you.

        You’d probably class him as an apostate and want to have him shot or something. But you should read and learn about objectivity.

        You muppet.

  • Robert_Eve

    Trust the Limp Dumbs to object to changing the Hunting Act rules.

    • Conway

      It would have brought the legislation in line with Scotland. I wonder why they find “equality” so compelling elsewhere, but not in this case.

  • HookesLaw

    Fox hunting has not been banned has it?
    You can still hunt them and shoot them and snare them and poison them and gas them.

    I am sure that consumers will welcome energy price freezes but Cameron should have pointed out that sadly they are being paid for by job cuts and investment being cancelled.

    And energy price freezes are with us now, and so its one less valid reason for voting labour.

    • Hello

      It’s not as potent as Miliband thinks anyway. Cameron got their first with his cheapest tariff pledge months before. The electorate will remember that the Conservatives care about energy prices too, that ultimately brings the issue back to competence, the exact policy is immaterial.

      • MalcolmRedfellow

        What is significance of “anyway” in that first sentence? Or is it, like what follows, redundant?

        One competence is spotting the difference between “their”, “there, and “they’re”. Or proof-reading and using the correction facility.

        Does the electorate (an abstraction) have a collective memory?

        And when is a policy “exact”?

        Must millions of harmless electrons have to sweat to replicate these turgid utterances?

        • Hello

          Many thanks for you’re comments anyway. Ill tkae notice of theym when u start paying me. Go back to bed granddad.

        • HookesLaw

          har har har – labour are on the run indeed aren’t they. And BTW if pixels can be wasted on your turgidicity then they can be wasted on mine.

          • Makroon

            Turgid it may be, but why was the Redster’s post censored ?
            Foxhunting – Cameron saved from his own stupidity by the LibDems. I thought Cameron promised to desist from futile Social agenda measures ?

    • Clued-Up

      Fox-hunting with dogs has been banned for around 7 years, as you surely know? The hunts, and individuals, within them have been successfully prosecuted on occasions.
      The much-loathed badger cull has bumped up public and police awareness of wildlife crime, much improved the public reputation of the hunt sabs and increased the numbers of those watching out for wildlife. All that’s probably going to produce an upsurge in the number of prosecutions taken out against illegal hunting.

      • HookesLaw

        Yes of course I know. But it is still legal to kill foxes and to do that you have to by definition hunt them out.
        The culling of badgers was not a wild life crime it was a legal sanction. Foxes are vermin. Its not illegal to kill them any more than it is to kill a rat.

        • Fergus Pickering

          Define vermin?

          • Colonel Mustard

            Most of the people sitting on the opposition front benches.

        • GnosticBrian

          Have you any experience of controlling foxes? For me the most effective way is to “lamp” them. At night, a high pitched squeaking noise (mimic an animal in distress) attracts foxes; the lamp illuminates their eyes and (providing that it is not windy) a small calibre high velocity rifle is effective up to 400 meters when shooting prone and using a bipod. Of coarse you will be seen as a social pariah by those who hunt on horse back but your lambs and chickens will be safer.

      • Seadog

        As far as I’m concerned a good badger is a dead badger.

      • GnosticBrian

        Instead of a return to hunting foxes with dogs, perhaps we could be allowed to hunt Lib Dems or are they about to become a seriously endangered species?

      • ButcombeMan

        If you really believe that, you do not know the countryside. I frequently see the hunt and yes I see them accompanied by a slightly shifty bunch of “terrier men” .

        Nothing much has changed.

        Badger culling by farmers continues, slug pellets in cored out apples rolled into the set, that or the slurry tanker pumping the set full when the young are in there.

        In the countryside badger culling is just part of life. The big wonder is why they are protected.

        • Clued-Up

          I think you’ve just explained why it’s so important to give legal protection to badgers – and enforce the legislation too! The fine for harming badgers or the sett is up to £5,000 per animal (or imprisonment).

          • ButcombeMan

            There is a lot of countryside.
            i am not involved, I just observe.

            I conclude most commentators and politicians know next to nothing about the issues.

            I am unconvinced badgers need protection at ll. They are dominant and have no natural enemies except the motor car..

            I have only hit two in the last 12 months. I see lots of bodies.