Six African nations celebrate blocking of Trophy Hunting Bill
The Lords gift Botswana a pleasant 57th independence anniversary As controversial trophy Hunting Bill fails to pass
Botswana and five other Southern African countries sighed with relief at least for now as the House of the Lords blocked the controversial Hunting Trophies ( Import Prohibition) Bill last week.
Had the Lords allowed the Bill to pass, then it was going to be turned into a law, as the House of the Commons passed it without debating.
However, it is reported that already there are some animal rights activists who have already started knocking at 10 Downing Street, the office of the British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to have the Bill ‘‘ brought back in the new parliamentary session and for it to be included in the next Conservative party manifesto”.
Confirming the development, Philda Kereng, the Minister of Environment said it took the leadership of Botswana and her peers, beneficiaries, local authorities to be united in fighting for this cause.
“The decision by the House of the Lords also has implications for the six countries going into CITES as we are likely to receive or see a number of proposals wanting to destroy our tourism.
“But we are going to use this to motivate ourselves to continue being strong mobilising other countries to support us like when we were in Bahamas.
“The South Americans and Caribbean do not have wildlife, but realised that in many occasions when it is decision time on hunting related issues, such countries do not vote because they do understand the issue at stake.
“So we will continue with the campaign preparing for CITES so that this propels our philosophy, beliefs, principles and our people centred and balanced conservation,” she said.
Part of the official correspondence that Botswana Guardian is in possession of reads, “The members of the House of the Lords ( peers) who oppose the Bill had tabled 62 amendments for debate, including Lord Mancroft’s conservation amendment. “The house set aside four hours for the Committee to discuss these amendments, by the time Parliament closed at 10pm, only five amendments had been discussed.
“In light of the foregoing, it is evident that more time is required to complete this stage and, in order for the Bill to become law, it must be approved by the House of the Commons and the House of the Lords. “Before the end of October 2023, when the House rises for the King’s speech. As parliament closes between 20 September 2023 and 15th October 2023 for party conferences it is looking increasingly unlikely that the Bill will pass in the current parliament, unless government finds time between the 16- 30 October 2023 for the process to continue with their campaign against the Bill.” The correspondence further states that a meeting was held with Lord Mancroft’s on the morning of 18th September 2022 to assess the next course of action.
Lord Manfort is leading a team of members of the House of Lords who do not support the bill. It was noted how letters to Baroness Fookes and
the Times stating, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe’s opposition Bill were given a high degree of prominence throughout the debate with a number of Lords noting in their speeches that the Bill “ignores the wishes and the position of a number of countries, especially those from Sub- Saharan Africa’’.
Lord Bellingham, a former Minister of Africa, said the UK government should take note of ’ ‘‘ the huge Pushback from African Countries’’, noting that six countries support Lord Mancroft’s conservation amendment, as well as their involvement in the briefings attended by the wildlife experts, and the Botswana Delegation in the House of the Lords during the summer.
The active leadership of the six Southern African countries and their visible involvement in the campaign has had a significant impact on the process and Lord Mancroft’s has suggested that it would be extremely helpful if the countries were to publish a short letter re- iterating the position of these countries. If the Bill does fail in this parliament, it is already clear that the animal rights activists are lobbying No 10 Downing Street – The Prime Minister’s office to have the Bill brought back in the new parliamentary session and for it to be included in the next Conservative party manifesto.
A Joint statement issued by the six Southern African Countries namely, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe, thanking the 35 Lords who were against the Bill, titled RE: UNITED KINGDOM HUNTING TROPHIES ( IMPORT PROHIBITION) BILL, reads:
“We have taken note of the discussion in the House of Lords on the Government- backed Hunting Trophies Bill in the House of Lords on Tuesday evening. We applaud the thorough examination of the Bill during the debate.
“As representatives of African countries whose wildlife and communities will be impacted by the bill, we remain fully supportive of the scientific evidence referred to during the debate.
“We remain encouraged by the ‘ conservation amendment’, which mirrors
the recommendations and evidence put forward by the UK Government’s scientific advisory body, the JNCC, and which demonstrates the complexity of conservation and wildlife management in Southern Africa.
“We further continue to highlight the positive outcomes on wildlife that conservation laws and regulations have had in our part of the world.”
The Mail online which has been writing articles in support of Botswana and her peers for the Bill not to be passed in their article headlined ‘‘ African leaders hail end of the controversial Trophy Hunting Bill after politicians were accused of failing to listen to conservation experts” said the Controversial Trophy Hunting Bill has been blocked by the House of Lords after politicians were accused of failing to listen to conservation experts.
Rebel peers had asked for an amendment under which a small number of trophies could be imported if it could be shown that the hunting benefits conservation projects.
They had consulted African experts who claimed that the profits from some sustainable blood sports are needed to pay for such work.
The African nations that are home to the most endangered animals had criticised the ‘ arrogant’ legislation – which included a blanket ban on the import of all souvenir pelts and heads – for ignoring their views in favour of virtuesignalling celebrities such as Gary Lineker. But the Bill passed through the Commons unopposed in March.
The rebel peers asked the Government to insert the smart ban amendment. Ministers ‘ refused to compromise’ and so the rebels talked the Bill down and stopped it.
The decision follows sustained coverage of the issue by the Mail. It means the Bill can only pass if the Government allocates additional Parliamentary time – something the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, or Defra, has failed to commit to. Wildlife experts attacked the Government for the missed opportunity to address the horrors of big game hunting.