Food for thought before meetings

ed to a proposal from his Lib Dem colleague Mike Rumbles that rural workers who lose their jobs as a result of the ban should be compensated.

The document noted that there were ten hunts in Scotland and that up to 208 jobs would be lost as a result of the ban. It warned that dogs and horses might have to be put down.

It said: “Another difficult area is the possibility that sizeable numbers of pack hounds and horses may need to be destroyed if hunts do not turn to alternative sports such as drag hunting.

“Supporters of the Bill suggest that alternative use of the animals in this manner is the way forward, but this seems unlikely in Scotland and if that does not happen, the prospect is that some horses will be used for other equestrian purposes whilst others may either be destroyed or exported to the Continent for meat.”

Another document reveals that on the eve of vote, the then First Minister Jack Mcconnell was concerned that the government and parliament’s credibility would be undermined by the bill.

A memo from the First Minister circulated to his Cabinet colleagues in Feburary 2002 said: “There is a real danger that the reputation of the parliament and by implication the Executive will be seriously damaged if Stage 3 is chaotic or if the Parliament is seen to be passing a flawed Bill or one which does not successfully reflect its intentions. I am therefore clear that it is our responsibility to avoid this as far as possible.”

Last month Green MSP Alison Johnstone introduced another bid to outlaw the pursuit arguing the original foxhunting ban had failed. At the moment it is legal for foxes to be flushed from cover by dogs towards waiting guns. A review suggested that around 800 foxes are killed by hunts every year in Scotland, with one in five foxes killed by packs of hounds, in breach of the Protection of Wild Mammals Act 2002. Some of Donald Dewar’s ministers favoured toast over the traditional Scottish delicacy of shortbread when it came to their precabinet snack, the newly released documents show.

An email from a senior civil servant shows that the toast/shortbread debate was one of the first issues considered by the ministers charged with steering Scotland through the early days of devolution.

The email, headed Precabinet sustenance and written with tongue in cheek, said: “It has been put to me by sources very close to the Cabinet that some among its members would prefer toast to shortbread before the Tuesday meetings. We considered setting up a small focus group to study this in more detail.”

In the end the focus group option was rejected and officials were asked to choose between toast, shortbread and a third option to indicate ministers’ preferences.

Mysteriously, the email added: “Anyone choosing my third option will be removed from the Private Office and sent back to the Department to think deep policy thoughts.”

The email, dated August 1999, continued: “On the assumption that enough ministers want toast to make it worthwhile, can we arrange this by splashing out on a good quality large toaster so that ministers can make their own? That way they get it nice and hot and we don’t have to have someone running in and out of the kitchen.”

The official added: “We shall no doubt need to have another round of consultation on what kind of jam, marmalade, honey, marmite etc to put on that toast. But we’ll save that for another time.”