You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Britain
Labour minister announces/admits hunting ban is part of 'class struggle'
2004-11-21
An interestiong development in the UK hunting ban story. EFL
A member of the Government admits today that the hunting ban is driven by old-fashioned class warfare and is, at its heart, a bitter battle for control of Britain. Writing in The Telegraph, Peter Bradley, the parliamentary private secretary to Alun Michael, the rural affairs minister, reveals that the real reason that Labour MPs feel so strongly about the ban is because it is aimed at killing 'the old order' and is the first time in history that a Labour government has taken on 'the gentry'. Mr Bradley says: 'We ought at last to own up to it: the struggle over the Bill was not just about animal welfare and personal freedom: it was class war.' The MP for The Wrekin adds that it was the 'toffs' who declared war on Labour by resisting the ban [!!!], but agrees that both sides are battling for power, not animal welfare.
And here was me thinking one side was merely fighting to maintain the status quo, and get on with what's been a favourite part of rural life for centuries. But, NO, daring to resist the massive urban mob means you're 'battling for power'. What a f'kin tosser.
'This was not about the politics of envy but the polities of power. Ultimately it's about who chases foxes governs Britain.' Mr Bradley's comments are in stark contrast to statements from ministers, who have always lied claimed that the Act to ban hunting with hounds is about protecting wildlife. Mr Bradley, 51, admits that he personally sees the campaign to save hunting as an assault on his right to govern as a Labour MP. He protests that the hunting cause is made up of 'the privileged minority which for centuries ran this country from the manor houses of rural England' and tried to keep people like him 'in our place'. 'The placards of the Countryside Alliance plead 'Listen to Us' but what they mean is 'Do What We Say' - as for centuries we have. But that old order no longer prevails.' 'Labour governments have come and gone and left little impression on the gentry. But a ban on hunting touches them. It threatens their inalienable right to do as they please on their own land. Preparations to resist the ban, which was forced through Parliament last week, are gaining pace. When it comes into force on February 19, 10 days before the end of the season, hunts will go out as usual with 50,000 people preparing to break the new law then challenge police to charge them.
Seems a good time to take up the hobby.
Me, too. Do I have to wear one of those hats, though?
Posted by:Bulldog

#7  After they pass the law they have to enforce it. Based on the protests in London, they better have plenty of room in their prisons and a way to deal with jury nullification.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2004-11-21 10:38:05 AM  

#6  You definitely have to wear one of the hats. Else you risk getting your brains bashed

The whipppers hate to clean up brains.

If only they'ed repair the fences better.
Posted by: Shipman   2004-11-21 10:24:09 AM  

#5  Hmmm .... it would do so in the US, perhaps.

Actually it's very likley that it wouldn't. The class of persons at whom such a ban would be aimed here are not legally recognized as a protected class (indeed it's unlikely that a court would even recognize that a particular "class" of persons to be the target of the law) so almost any government justification for enacting such a ban would be upheld (think "pretense").
Posted by: AzCat   2004-11-21 10:22:52 AM  

#4  In Medieval Europe cats where demonized and reduced to endangered species levels of existence. The rat population expanded . When the plague arrived from Asia, the rats acting as a vector spreading the disease. The toll to humans was about a quarter of the continental population and about a third of England. The idiots in the isles just went through mad cow disease and can’t see the value in controlling another animal population which can act as a vector. Instead by making the issue a political canard, they are acting just like the superstitious peasants of Medieval Europe. Good luck boys, you're going to need it. Oh, and if there is any related outbreaks, the government will have to step in and expend resources to do what has been done privately at no expense to the taxpayer previously. We're from the government, we're here to help you.
Posted by: Don   2004-11-21 10:10:03 AM  

#3  Hmmm .... it would do so in the US, perhaps. But in British legal precedent, would that matter? Just asking - don't know.
Posted by: rkb   2004-11-21 7:57:03 AM  

#2  His admission is going to doom the ban when it gets it's hearing in a law court. It is the act of denying a class of people the right to persue an activity baised on their birth, who they are or their wealth.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2004-11-21 7:51:05 AM  

#1  People doing what the want on thier own land.Buncha barbarians,whats wrong with these people? Don't they know that the land belongs to the Socialist Brotherhood(sarc).Wankers!
Posted by: raptor   2004-11-21 6:57:44 AM  

00:00