The Support Hunting Association is one
of the UK's most prominent pro-hunting organisations, now incorporating
issues related to Game Shooting, Fox Hunting and Angling.
About Us
|
Full Contents
 |
| The
menus below contain the full contents of the site.
|
Search our site
|
| Search our site using Google. |
|
|
2007 Oakley
Hounds Calendar
|
 |
All profits from this calendar will be donated
equally to two local good causes. The Thames Valley and Chiltern Air
Ambulance and the Oakley Hounds. |
Have you seen these
pages?
|
| Police View
of a hunting ban - Two chief constables voice their concern on
a ban on hunting.
Timelines -On the current Hunting
Bill, the attempts to ban hunting, and on the ban in Scotland.
Hunting vs. Human
Rights - Parliament has advised that the Hunting Bill is incompatible
with the Human Rights Act. |
Quotes
|
The ban has guaranteed that the time and money invested by the League
Against Cruel Sports and the RSPCA has increased animal suffering.
We told them this would happen. This rise in suffering since the ban
is the cost of ignoring that warning!
Daily Telegraph
3 May 2005.
Numerous police officers accompanied the more than 250 hunts which
took place yesterday, the first day that the sport became illegal.
Despite the friendly exchanges between officers and huntsmen and women,
the presence of the police posed a question: what public good were
they trying to uphold?
Daily Telegraph
20 February 2005.
|
|
|
Hunting Bill fails to satisfy
Human Rights committee - 26 November 2003
|
The Governments Hunting Bill as it stands
- banning all forms of hunting whether intentional or not - has failed
to receive the approval of the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human
Rights.
 The
committee found that the bill fell short of the Human Rights Act on
two accounts, the issue of banning hunting on private land and that
of compensation for those affected.
They asked DEFRA to clarify the issues and are reported to be unsatisfied
with the response they received. They are now writing a 'strongly-worded'
letter to the government to get the bill re-drafted.
A source revealed to The Times, "The committee’s intervention
does not have any effect on the progress of the Bill. All we do is
raise questions and report our conclusions to the House . . . in the
end it is Parliament’s right to legislate”.
However, if the bill falls short of the HRA in the eyes of this committee
it means that the chances of success in overturning the ban in the
courts are high.
The original Hunting Bill
The original draft of the bill - as introduced in December last year
- poses no problems to the Human Rights Act. The HRC looks at several
aspects of a bill:
The right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
The committee found that "[the bill] generally struck a fair
balance between the public interest and the rights of those whom the
Bill would affect"; so they were satisfied.
The Economic Impacts of the bill.
The committee "were likely to be satisfied in view of the fact
that, among other considerations, the Bill originally introduced a
registration system rather than a ban, and
made provision for transitional arrangements"; so again they
were satisfied.
Private Life.
The committee found that in respect of the bill intruding into hunter's
private lives, that the bill "serves a legitimate aim, respond
to a pressing social need and be proportionate to the object pursued...
This was in the context of a less than total prohibition on hunting
with dogs."; again they were satisfied that the bill did not
contradict the Human Rights Act in this respect
Discrimination.
The committee found that any discrimination within the bill "[is]
not based on a personal characteristic and can be justified objectively"
Conclusion.
The committee concluded, "At present, and subject to any
amendments being introduced to the Bill at a later stage, we do not
consider that the Bill gives rise to a significant risk of incompatibility
with Convention rights".
The Hunting Bill as amended
The Hunting Bill was then amended on 30th June 2003 by Labour MP Tony
Banks to ban hunting of all forms of hunting. The committee's final
report of the latest session of parliament has concluded that the
bill fails to satisfy, in their opinion, the Human Rights Act.
Property Rights
The Committee pointed out that the bill makes illegal any contract
that hunts have with their workers, and thus under the Human Rights
Act must compensate them.
The original bill allowed hunting to continue under licence, however
it was amended by backbench Labour MPs in its report stage on 30th
June 2003. They commented. "...we draw to the attention of each
House our view of the human rights implications of the absence from
the Bill of any compensation scheme, particularly in relation to the
deprivation of the benefit of vested rights under contracts already
entered into."
Private Life
With respects to Private Life the committee reserved judgement, "The
Government considers that hunting with dogs does not engage the right
to respect for private life under the Human Rights Act, because its
nature is essentially public and it falls outside the meanings given
to ‘private life’ by the European Court of Human Rights.
In any case, the Government considers that the Bill’s interference
with the activities would have been justifiable as being in accordance
with the law and, like other animal welfare legislation, necessary
in a democratic society for the protection of morals."
Conclusion
"We do not wish to express any concluded view as to whether hunting
on one’s own land would be regarded as falling outside the realm
of ‘private life’ for the purpose. On the other hand,
like the Government, we are satisfied that the interference with that
right would be likely to be regarded as justifiable." |
Related
links
|
|
|
