Election: For Fox Sake! Why, Theresa, Why?

You would think that Theresa May would be flat out in this hectic election campaign working on Brexit, the NHS, social care cuts and taking down Jeremy Corbyn. Instead the PM has taken precious time to weigh in on fox hunting, a subject that was laid to rest some time ago. She’s suggesting that the 2004 ban on the blood sport could now be lifted despite being widely supported across the country. So what is May up to?

Why the Tally-Ho?

May declared in a TV interview that she has never been fox hunting but has always been in favour of it. That puts her in the minority. An Ipsos MORI survey from December 2016 found that 84% of people were in favour of keeping the hunting ban.

Given that May’s personal experience of hunting is limited those stats could help to guide her policies but she seems to think the minority opinion counts for more. She wasn’t so stubborn when it came to standing by her support for EU membership, her manifesto promise on social care, or her promise not to hold a snap election, so why is she digging her heels in on hunting?

It all comes down to a delicate pre-election tightrope in which she is carefully trying to send the right signals to various parts of the electorate. Revisiting an issue that was settled by previous governments is not about fox hunting at all but about managing the public perception of Theresa May’s values. This issue is as much a dog whistle as a fox bugle.

Tightrope Theresa

The PM and her campaign chief Lynton Crosby are sending out cleverly targetted – and often contradictory – messages intended to appeal to different slices of the electorate. Her vow to impose an Ed Miliband-style cap on energy prices dangles financial relief in front of poorer voters and positions her as a leader willing to stand up to big business. The business sector has enough in the Tory manifesto to keep it happy, and in any case has nowhere else to go.

One danger in reaching out to energy consumers with a fairness and social justice message is that she could come across as too socially liberal to old-time Tory voters, which is where issues like fox hunting come in.

David Cameron tried to repeal Labour’s ban on fox hunting back in 2015 and was quickly thwarted by an unprecedented rebellion among his own Tory MPs. Up to 70 Tories were against the repeal, with Kent MP Sir Roger Gale warning that “Fox hunting has had its day.” Gale, the patron of Conservatives Against Fox Hunting, said that “the recent increase in numbers of Conservative MPs who have now come out publicly against the repeal of the Hunting Act means that any attempt to repeal the Act at this stage is doomed to failure.”

The SNP piled in by announcing that it would vote against the repeal, despite it not affecting Scottish hunting laws. Cameron was forced to scrap the planned vote.

Little has changed on the issue since then and May knows it. But this is one of those issues that is not the top priority of most opponents but is hugely motivating for supporters of hunting. Their electoral support has been revved-up with little effort from May, who hasn’t even needed to put a time scale on her promise.

Fox Hunting Facts

May’s justification for this repeal is that fox hunting is less cruel than other methods of culling foxes, while hunters say they provide a service in controlling the fox population.

Foxes are actually remarkably self-regulating when it comes to numbers – their breeding speeds up or slows down depending on their population. The last study on the subject was in 2004 and showed that the number of foxes hadn’t really changed since 1981. That was before the ban took place but a separate RSPCA study showed that numbers hadn’t changed when hunting was suspended for a year in 2001. The head of the 2004 study Prof. Stephen Harris also stated that the number of foxes killed in hunts each year was so “minuscule” that the ban would have no effect on numbers.

As for cruelty, it doesn’t take a genius to work out that outnumbering, chasing and terrifying an animal with a pack of hounds and horses before mauling it to death isn’t a kind or humane way of culling. There’s no doubt that foxes can be a problem. They carry disease and kill livestock and other animals so their numbers do need to be monitored and sometimes maintained.

The one place where it makes particular sense to be pro-fox is in London. While no one likes the idea of foxes killing and eating little bunnies and lambs we change our tune pretty quickly when it comes to rats. Urban foxes don’t just rifle your bins, they control London’s massive rat population and if ever there was a pro-fox argument that is it.

Frankly the Tories can keep their fox-bashing election tactics to themselves. Londoners are better off spending an extra minute or two securing their bin lids against foxes each week if the trade-off is that they avoid a rat infestation.

 

 

by Jo Davey

The post Election: For Fox Sake! Why, Theresa, Why? appeared first on Felix Magazine.