Okay so there I was, sitting and writing up an article regarding a fox hunting interview I did for newsgathering when I stumbled upon this: click for article.

It is in a Welsh publication and concerns the leader of the opposing Conservative party (who are looking more and more likely to win the next election), David Cameron.

He is talking about how, if the Conservatives are elected, they will give all MPs a free vote as to whether the controversial Hunting Act should be reversed.

For all non-natives and ignorant Brits, the Hunting Act was passed three years ago by Labour - it was a huge deal at the time with millions of protests etc so you should remember it. Anyway, it was heralded as an outright ban on hunting yet to campaigners' disappointment it actually stopped bugger all. All it did was make it illegal for hounds to actually kill the foxes - hunters could still happily flush foxes out, chase them and shoot them. Plus the act wasn't exactly welcomed by rural police forces which consisted of a large number of officers who were sympathetic to fox hunters seeing as they actually live in the countryside themselves. Due to this, the law was never really enforced and animal rights campaigners took it upon themselves to enforce the law and protest at every available opportunity - something which in my opinion got very annoying.

Needless to say, the act did the opposite to what its aim was. It actually made hunting a lot more popular whilst failing to enforce what was in it. If anything, it helped the pro-hunting party. 300,000 people turned up to over 314 traditional hunts on Boxing Day last year in England ... that shows how little changed.

Now the Conservatives have a high concentration of upper-class Lords and Ladies amongst their ranks so in general, the party are going to be very much pro-fox hunting and have always tended to side with the rural, affluent communities of which the sport is a way of life. My town for example is in Fenland which is extremely rural and affluent and has always been ruled by the Conservative party even though Labour has maintained the national vote. This is basically down to farming communities always voting in favour of the Conservatives and more urban areas/cities voting for Labour ... its just a fact.

I just find it interesting that as the election draws closer, Cameron is dredging up every possible issue that he can use in his favour including the hunting ban. Its definitely a vote winner but the way that Labour are performing at the moment with that idiot Gordon Brown (who no-one likes may I add), it is more or less a dead cert for the Conservatives to win the next election. I do think Labour still have a chance of winning though, they just need to change their leader and quick so that people have chance to forget about him. People resent having a PM that they didn't even vote for.

As the article says, Cameron's 'free vote' would probably never work seeing as the Lib Dem party have a casting vote and half of them voted in favour of the ban last time around. To me though, it seems as though the 'free vote' is just a vague explanation and I suspect that they would in fact just go ahead and reverse the act without one (or at least try). He most likely said that to gain added support from pro-hunting voters whilst being safe enough not to lose voters that may be anti.

Don't you just love politics?

Oh, and I'm pro by the way, before you ask ;)