SNP will vote against bid to relax fox-hunting ban

Tories face defeat as Nationalists insist move would assert Scottish interests

DAVID Cameron is facing the threat of his first Commons defeat since May’s General Election after SNP MPs announced they will vote against Conservative plans to relax the fox-hunting ban in England and Wales.

The Nationalists said the move would “assert the Scottish interest on fox hunting”.

Downing Street had earlier urged the SNP’s 56 MPs to abstain in the crucial vote tomorrow, arguing that the changes would not affect their constituents.

But the combination of the Nationalists and Labour, who had urged the Scots MPs to vote with them against the legislation, threatens to bring a first defeat for the Prime Minister on a major policy since he was returned to power with a majority of 12.

Defending the decision, SNP Westminster group leader Angus Robertson said: “We totally oppose fox hunting, and when there are moves in the Scottish Parliament to review whether the existing Scottish ban is strong enough, it is in the Scottish interest to maintain the existing ban in England and Wales for Holyrood to consider.”

He added: “We are in a situation where the Tory Government is refusing to agree to any amendments to improve the Scotland Bill – which are supported by 58 of Scotland’s 59 MPs – and imposing English Votes for English Laws to make Scotland’s representation at Westminster second-class.

“In these circumstances, it is right and proper that we assert the Scottish interest on fox hunting by voting with Labour against the Tories’ proposals to relax the ban – in the process, reminding an arrogant UK government of just how slender its majority is – just as we will vote against the Tory welfare cuts next week, and appeal to Labour to join us.”

SNP MPs who opposed the move would have to justify their decision to their voters, who would be unaffected by any changes, the Prime Minister’s official spokeswoman added.

The result of the vote is expected to be extremely close, leading to speculation that it could be swung by the votes of the SNP.

The party traditionally does not vote on “England-only” issues.

But critics claim that the small print of the reforms suggests that the changes could have knock-on effects for Scotland.

Opponents of fox hunting are also suspicious about the Conservatives announcing plans they claim will bring the law into line with Scotland, in what they believe was a move designed to convince the SNP to abstain.

At the weekend, Labour made a pitch to the SNP for support. The party’s MPs argue the plans would bring fox hunting in by the back door after it was outlawed by Tony Blair’s Government in 2004.

They warned that the issue of fox hunting did not “stop at the Border”.

The Conservatives insisted that the plans would merely bring the law in England and Wales into line with that in Scotland.

The changes would allow dogs to be used to to flush out foxes to be shot for pest control purposes.

Traditional fox hunting with dogs is illegal across the UK.

In England and Wales at the moment only two dogs can be used to flush out a fox so that a farmer or landowner can shoot it.

In Scotland, however, an unlimited number of dogs can be used.

Hunting supporters have backed the move, insisting that traditional hunting would still remain illegal.

The reforms would simply make it easier to manage fox populations and deal with pests, they argue.

The Conservatives have given their MPs a free vote and a number of ministers, including the sports minister Tracey Crouch, are expected to vote against the Government.

The rebels will be joined by MPs from Labour and the Liberal Democrats among others.

Celebrities including Ricky Gervais, Morrissey, Sadie Frost and Stella McCartney and Queen’s Brian May have all called on MPs to keep the fox-hunting ban intact.

Robbie Marsland, Director of League Against Cruel Sports Scotland said: “We applaud the decision of the SNP to oppose repeal of the Hunting Act through the back door.

“They have rightly taken a stand against animal cruelty.”

THE obduracy of SNP MPs in regard to the vote to change fox-hunting rules at Westminster might yet prove to be counter-productive. The attractions for David Cameron’s opponents of inflicting a humiliating defeat on the Prime Minister over a Conservative manifesto pledge are easy to discern.

The vote to relax the ban on hunting with dog packs seems likely to be lost with SNP MPs joining Labour, who oppose the measure, and rebel Tories. Without the Scottish contingent, the Government would almost certainly have succeeded.

Anti-fox-hunting campaigners put pressure on the SNP’s 56 MPs to vote against the changes planned by the Tories. The SNP traditionally operates according to the long-standing self-denying ordinance that sees MPs abstain on matters affecting only England.

Having chosen not to abstain this time, SNP MPs will be intervening in a vote many see as very much affecting England only.

Mr Cameron has not opted for a straightforward repeal of the fox-hunting ban in England but instead proposes to make changes to the existing Hunting Act. There are arguments that some of the changes to the act that are proposed – relating to “loopholes” allowing hunting for the purposes of research and observation – might undermine the effect of the law in Scotland by encouraging Scottish hunts to take a similar route. The potential impact north of the Border of softer English legislation forms a central part of the SNP’s decision.

But that argument could be applied to any law passed at Westminster but it is not a commonplace SNP defence. There almost certainly will be battles ahead over what constitute English laws, and to what extent decisions in England that affect budgets in Scotland can possibly be seen as purely English votes.

The English Votes for English Laws (Evel) debate could hardly be more current, with the Government having only just conceded the need for more discussion, postponing a vote on its controversial plans until the autumn. This seems to be a strange time to stoke resentment over an issue over which Scotland already has its own law.

Before the recent UK General Election Nicola Sturgeon was clear. The SNP at Westminster, regardless of the number of their representatives, would be constructive, not obstructive. She reiterated that intention after her party’s historic landslide vote in May. Reneging on the self-denying ordinance at this point would seem to be entirely contrary to that approach.

It may be that the SNP leadership feels it is necessary to show that its MPs will play hardball too, if Mr Cameron chooses to do so over Evel and the limited greater powers on offer to Scotland.

But to thwart the intention of English MPs over fox hunting, despite the temptation of defeating the Government, would be a mistake regardless of the SNP’s principled objection to fox hunting. It could fuel confrontation and the playing of politics in a short-term, partisan way when diplomacy is what is required.

The Prime Minister’s official spokesman has indicated that the SNP will have to justify to its voters why MPs are voting on matters not affecting them. But the real challenge will be to justify this to English voters. An inability to do so might have malign consequences for the outcome of more weighty debates to come.