What Has New Labour Done Right?

[Potwalloper]

I am not rude to people who are polite to me. However, you have offended our intellegence and hav eno right to claim any moral high ground.

Stop being silly and I will stop being rude.

I think we have come as far as you are willing to go.

I was reasonably polite.

I don't want any of your moral high ground, thank you.

Do you identify with Harry Enfield's character?

[QP1]

Yet bear baiting and **** fighting have been banned, so your hundreds of years arguments is clearly a hairy pair of balls.

So, tradition is not the issue, class is not the issue, the issue is clearly (embarrasingly clearly to all but the occasional retard) that hte majority of people find the thought of grown men leading a pack of hounds of rip a fox to pieces offensive. Do you not think that the third reason might be the biggie?

If the issue is one of barbarity, what about grown men sticking a barbed hook through a fish's mouth and dragging it out of the water to 'drown' or have its head bashed in?

If the issue is animal welfare, why not target the conditions in which livestock are kept/reared - you could improve the lot of far more animals (and likely reduce the incidence of diseases which can be passed up the food chain) than with a ban on fox hunting.

Fox hunting was singled out because it is associated (rightly or wrongly) with toffs - at the time Labour MPs even went so far as to admit it was Labour's "revenge for Thatcher's defeat of the miners" (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1472099/Hunt-ban-is-revenge-for-Thatchers-defeat-of-the-miners-says-Labour-MP.html)

For the record, I have never been on a hunt, nor do I know many people who have. I find the idea of adults in funny costumes chasing a fox to its death vaguely ridiculous and somewhat disturbing, but not as disturbing as Labour spending so much time/effort/money legislating against it out of pure spite.

[Bob8]

If the issue is one of barbarity, what about grown men sticking a barbed hook through a fish's mouth and dragging it out of the water to 'drown' or have its head bashed in?

If the issue is animal welfare, why not target the conditions in which livestock are kept/reared - you could improve the lot of far more animals (and likely reduce the incidence of diseases which can be passed up the food chain) than with a ban on fox hunting.

Fox hunting was singled out because it is associated (rightly or wrongly) with toffs - at the time Labour MPs even went so far as to admit it was Labour's "revenge for Thatcher's defeat of the miners" (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1472099/Hunt-ban-is-revenge-for-Thatchers-defeat-of-the-miners-says-Labour-MP.html)

For the record, I have never been on a hunt, nor do I know many people who have. I find the idea of adults in funny costumes chasing a fox to its death vaguely ridiculous and somewhat disturbing, but not as disturbing as Labour spending so much time/effort/money legislating against it out of pure spite.

There is legislation on the conditions in which animals are reared for meat and as far as I am aware, being chased by hounds who wish to rip them apart is not an approved method of slaughter.

That fish are not considered as having the same pain function as foxes is clear.

Then, to top it off, you cite the Telegraph as the neutral guy to judge the issue!

Go on, you are just taking the mick are you not?

[Potwalloper]

Then, to top it off, you cite the Telegraph as the neutral guy to judge the issue!

Barry Sheerman, a Blair loyalist and chairman of the Commons education select committee, said he was dismayed that some of his colleagues were using hunting in this way.

Is your assertion that The Telegraph made this up?

[Grime- skint wouldbe ftb]

Yet bear baiting and **** fighting have been banned, so your hundreds of years arguments is clearly a hairy pair of balls.

So, tradition is not the issue, class is not the issue, the issue is clearly (embarrasingly clearly to all but the occasional retard) that hte majority of people find the thought of grown men leading a pack of hounds of rip a fox to pieces rip a fox to piece offensive. Do you not think that the third reason might be the biggie?

" rip a fox to pieces " -- your use of such preposterous emotive language negates your argument. Animals kill other animals! Get over it! And you cannot compare a hunt (hey, again, you might need to be reminded what you actually are, ever heard the phrase hunter gatherer?!) to a cruel sport such as baiting. Now back to your fridge for some comfort eating, mmmm tofu!!

[Bob8]

" rip a fox to pieces " -- your use of such preposterous emotive language negates your argument. Animals kill other animals! Get over it! And you cannot compare a hunt (hey, again, you might need to be reminded what you actually are, ever heard the phrase hunter gatherer?!) to a cruel sport such as baiting. Now back to your fridge for some comfort eating, mmmm tofu!!

Yet, there is legislation for the killing of animals. Presumably purely out of spite to people who eat meat. Look, I have discussed this a few points back. Asserting it is class based is silly.

It is only a few posts back, have a little look.

Chute,

I did ask you not to bother me further.

Regarding the Telegraph, I could probably find an article in the Guardian that had a posh person saying the opposite. I would quite rightly be held in teh same derision, in which I hold you for quoting the Telegraph in this discussion (though, incidentally, I read the Telegraph and not the Guardian).

[Tankus]

Increased the size of Blairs and Mandys property portfolio thereby signifigantly increasing the wealth of private ownership in the nation .

are you on drugs? do you think people all lived in caves before Labour came along?

eee's a splitter ..he is !

[Cogs]

Why? Spies and 4X4 assault vehicles qualify, don't they?

I disagree. Tufty may not be likeable (you make that clear), but she does live here. The point of banning foxes was specifically to upset her and her type, not for any other reason. I think she should have been allowed to carry on, as long as the rest of us would be allowed to keep clear of her.

The hate and ban brigade would get rid of 4X4 cars too. They won't win because too many of the Islington set drive them.

No, a class war would include people being killed/sent to do hard labour.

It has happened, it is straying into dangerous hyperbole to suggest foxhunting is comparable.

As to the hypothetical Ms. Tufton, perhaps you missed the point I was making.

She doesn't like foxhunting. She is however posh. I'm suggesting claims of 'class war' are designed to recruit her to the side of the foxhunting fraternity (who, as we've already discussed aren't necessarily drawn from any social class in reality) on the basis of identity politics.

[Potwalloper]

No, a class war would include people being killed/sent to do hard labour.

It has happened, it is straying into dangerous hyperbole to suggest foxhunting is comparable.

Point taken. It is about groups of people not liking each other, though and not about dear little foxes.

I won't address Bob8 directly, as he gets hot under the peaked cap - but to contribute to the thread - wherever the quote appeared, it was a blatant admission from insiders that the legislators were taking their revenge against 'toffs'.

[Guest Skinty]

Personally I'd like to see fox hunters hunted down for hours on end by packs of chavs.

Of course after the chavs are no longer in peak physical condition they'd have to be retired and destroyed as well as they have tasted blood and can't be allowed a life outside of fox-hunter hunting.

And if anyone says this is a class thing, then I'd say that there isn't an upper and a lower class, just two classes of parasites and a productive class.

[QP1]

Regarding the Telegraph, I could probably find an article in the Guardian that had a posh person saying the opposite. I would quite rightly be held in teh same derision, in which I hold you for quoting the Telegraph in this discussion (though, incidentally, I read the Telegraph and not the Guardian).

How about the Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/c...icle6301515.ece

Or the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/mar...cietysupplement

Whatever your motivation for believing the hunting ban was "the right thing to do" the fact remains that (some) Labour MPs openly admitted that they voted for the legislation out of spite.

Yet, there is legislation for the killing of animals. Presumably purely out of spite to people who eat meat. Look, I have discussed this a few points back. Asserting it is class based is silly.

Legislation which many would regard as inadequate - the tightening of which would reduce far more the number of animals suffering than a fox hunting ban and likely have a beneficial effect on the health of people eating the meat. I imagine it would also be far less contentious and have taken up much less parliamentary time.

That fish are not considered as having the same pain function as foxes is clear.

And yet (as far as I know) it is generally agreed that fish do feel pain and angling is an example of people deriving pleasure from killing an animal for recreational purposes. At least the fox hunters can make the argument that, as pests, the foxes will be controlled one way or another (e.g. they will be poisoned if not hunted).

Again, for the record, I really couldn't care less about fox hunting one way or the other, what I care about is this vile, spiteful, hypocritical 'government'. If they were bothered about animal welfare there are far easier ways to improve the lot of far more animals, so why focus on fox hunting if animal welfare was the prime motivation? If the issue is the disapproval of the 'barbarity' of a sport that involves killing animals, why not also look at angling?

[Grime- skint wouldbe ftb]

Yet, there is legislation for the killing of animals. Presumably purely out of spite to people who eat meat. Look, I have discussed this a few points back. Asserting it is class based is silly.

It is only a few posts back, have a little look.

You seem be confusing the hunting of a pest with rearing animals for food. Foxes aren't hunted for food, they are hunted to protect poultry etc which are reared for food.

For the record I dislike hunting because of the nuisance and danegr a pack of dogs and horses charging across public land creates, but that could be fixed by restricting them to privately owned land only.

[Cogs]

Personally I'd like to see fox hunters hunted down for hours on end by packs of chavs.

Of course after the chavs are no longer in peak physical condition they'd have to be retired and destroyed as well as they have tasted blood and can't be allowed a life outside of fox-hunter hunting.

And if anyone says this is a class thing, then I'd say that there isn't an upper and a lower class, just two classes of parasites and a productive class.

[6538]

Good Grief, these clearly idiotic arguments do irritiate me.

Do you genuinely believe that if fox hunting was done by lads from council estates riding mopeds that it would be protected? It would not even require specific legislation to ban it. Do you imagine that these moped hunts would be protected by the police and then if banned the police would announce they did not hae the resources to police it that way? No, you do not believe it, but you seem to be hoping that we will be stupid enough to believe you.

The point I'm getting at is that it was banned purely because the lefties wanted to persecute the type of people they precieve take part in it ie; the upper classes. It was a pure class war thing without any actual animal welfare behind it. The thing is that the majority of those who took part were not upper class in any sense of the word and hunt employees certainly weren't.

Your analogy is inane because if lots if people want to go hunting foxes on mopeds then they are perfectly entitled to do it if they are private land. I don't understand what your objection is to the police involvement. Prior to it being banned hunting was (and probably still is) perfectly legal. Why is there a problem with the police turning out to prevent people invading private land in order to prevent people carrying out a lawful activity. What's good about the police committing significant resources following people on the off chance they may commit what is a pretty minor offence? It's a total waste of money and manpower.

I also note that you have not addressed my position that the ban is so difficult to actually enforce that it amounts pretty much to no ban at all and, even if it were enforcable, it doesn't actually ban what the greenies thought it banned when they voted for it.

[6538]

Yet bear baiting and **** fighting have been banned, so your hundreds of years arguments is clearly a hairy pair of balls.

So, tradition is not the issue, class is not the issue, the issue is clearly (embarrasingly clearly to all but the occasional retard) that hte majority of people find the thought of grown men leading a pack of hounds of rip a fox to pieces offensive. Do you not think that the third reason might be the biggie?

Bear bating and **** fighting are not comparable to fox hunting. Both were carried out solely for sport and were things which do not occur naturally. Fox hunting was carried out primarily for pest control purposes and is essentially just a variation of what happens in nature everyday.

[Grime- skint wouldbe ftb]

The real issue here is that Labour's obsession with "punishing toffs" was ongoing at the same time as the conditions that allowed Islamic Jihad in Britain to reach the point of suicide bombings. While mosques across Britain were home to hate preachers, Islamic bookshops sold works of pure evil, and the conditions that breed terrorsits were allowed to ferment and grow, Labour went for the soft target of a sport with mostly Tory support.

[6538]

Yet, there is legislation for the killing of animals. Presumably purely out of spite to people who eat meat. Look, I have discussed this a few points back. Asserting it is class based is silly.

It is only a few posts back, have a little look.

Chute,

I did ask you not to bother me further.

Regarding the Telegraph, I could probably find an article in the Guardian that had a posh person saying the opposite. I would quite rightly be held in teh same derision, in which I hold you for quoting the Telegraph in this discussion (though, incidentally, I read the Telegraph and not the Guardian).

You are utterly wrong on that. It was entirely class based - at least based upon the classes that the lefties thought took part. If you ever hung around boards like this at the time of the ban and before you would see that only too clearly. The class prejudice was vicious. This was even the case of people directly and strongly connected to the labour party, anyone who used to hang around the Labour Animal Welfare Society board would tell you that.

It was class driven through and through. All of the arguments used against fox hunting could very easily be used against fishing but never were. The reason; millions of potential labour voters - you know, salt of the earth hard-working family people - did it.

There was no animal welfare issue to it that could ever logically stand up to scrutiny. Killing foxes with dogs was cruel, apparently, even though this is simply what happens in nature every day, yet sticking a hook through the mouth of a fish, dragging it into an environment in which it couldn't breathe and cause it be be effectively burned by human hands only to be thrown to have it happen again was perfectly acceptable. It is even more ridiculous as far as foxes were concerned because the alternative ways to control them which were pefectly accptable were, shooting (which with the best will int he world will result in horrible wounding on ocasion), gassing (which is just horrible) and poisoning which is about the same. Not only that but the Act specifically made provision for an exemption for foxes to be killed - wait for it - by a bird of prey. So, those who voted for the ban seem to think that getting ripped apart by some dogs is abhorrently cruel yet being ripped apart by a bird of prey is perfectly acceptable. That point alone is glaring evidence of the fact that animal welfare was not behind the ban in any way, shape or form. It was about banning something that was seen as traditional and culturally important to the types of people that traditional labourites hated.

[6538]

You seem be confusing the hunting of a pest with rearing animals for food. Foxes aren't hunted for food, they are hunted to protect poultry etc which are reared for food.

For the record I dislike hunting because of the nuisance and danegr a pack of dogs and horses charging across public land creates, but that could be fixed by restricting them to privately owned land only.

Private land.

[Grime- skint wouldbe ftb]

Private land.

The nearest I've been to a hunt and was in fear for my own dog's safety was on public land in the mid 1990s.

Either way, the hunting ban has been held up as some shining example of something New Labour have got right. It clearly isn't, and 10000s of words have been written explaining why, for example:

The hunt ban: a bad law with nowhere to run

Not only did it waste 700 hours of parliament's time in the year before the July 7 bombings, the hated speaker Michael Martin invoked the Parliament Act in order to ignore the House of Lords and railroad the Bill through.

Yes. What a fabulous example of Labour getting something "right".

[Danny Deflation]

I'm not a New labour supporter and things under Gordon Brown are a mess, but surely the Blair / Brown government must have done something good, something successful.

What would you nominate as a New Labour success story?

My nomination is the introduction of Right to Roam, althought it is fairly limited in scope and it was hardly a top priority issue. But it benefitted many people and it was in line with genuine social-democratic principles.

Made steps to ban fox hunting (although it still goes on).

Given IR decisions to the BoE (still not ideal, but better than IR decisions being made by the government).

Stopped Ian Duncan Smith from becoming out prime minister, while, paradoxically perhaps, showing that anyone - even Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling - can become Prime Minister or Chancellor.

Down classifying cannabis (although they ruined their good work by re-classifying it a year or two later).

Lowered the age of consent for gay men to the same as it is for heterosexual men. (I'm as straight as Tom Jones, but it still seems fair.)

Sadly, a post listing what Labour, in my view, have done wrong would be much, much longer.

[the coming storm]

Made steps to ban fox hunting (although it still goes on).

Given IR decisions to the BoE (still not ideal, but better than IR decisions being made by the government).

Stopped Ian Duncan Smith from becoming out prime minister, while, paradoxically perhaps, showing that anyone - even Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling - can become Prime Minister or Chancellor.

Down classifying cannabis (although they ruined their good work by re-classifying it a year or two later).

Lowered the age of consent for gay men to the same as it is for heterosexual men. (I'm as straight as Tom Jones, but it still seems fair.)

Sadly, a post listing what Labour, in my view, have done wrong would be much, much longer.

What about introducing the minimum wage. Helping to raise the standard of living of the poorest.

[Danny Deflation]

Fox hunting was carried out primarily for pest control purposes and is essentially just a variation of what happens in nature everyday.

Two points:

1. The morons who chase after foxes do it for FUN. Don't be fooled: they haven't got the environment or the dynamics of the local ecosystem in mind when they're chasing an animal to exhaustion and to a messy death.

2. If it happens in nature, as you suggest, then there's no reason for humans to do it. Unless of course it gives them a hard on.

[Guest Skinty]

With regards to fox hunting, whether or not the government had an anti- upper class agenda, most of the population who do not like fox hunting do not see it as anything to do with class.

As for it being a form of pest control, are you trying to tell us that there arn't more effective, humane and efficient methods? (this includes the hounds who get destroyed when they are no longer required)

Two wrongs also don't make a right. Just because some people go fishing for sport doesn't mean to say that fox hunting is OK. It just means that sport fishing is also inhumane.

Do we just admit that we're all scum and try and use that as an excuse not to have any morals? Or do we admit that we all have the propensity to be scum but that we can also be better if we make the effort?

[Danny Deflation]

With regards to fox hunting, whether or not the government had an anti- upper class agenda, most of the population who do not like fox hunting do not see it as anything to do with class.

Agree 100%. The "class argument" has always struck me as a misdirection for the real reason why most want hox hunting banned: because it's cruelty for the sake of some humans' enjoyment.

It's like when people say that if you don't like bull fighting, then you must hate the Spanish. Not true.

I have nothing against "toffs". It's cruel people I dislike.

[nobody777]

I Will never vote labour again in my life I find them as totally untrustworthy liars think the Europe constitution refurendum expenses wars etc but they have done some good things but very few these are

Stricking to Tory fiscal plan for first two years in office

The Minimum wage

Bank of England Independence may be now it only remains independent if it does what its told

Reducing VAT to 5% on fuel bills

Non means tested winter fuel payments

Peace in Ireland for me was a masterpiece and credit must be given

Fair working rights for part time workers pay and holiday entitlement etc

The NHS is a financial desaster its not perfect but its still a first class service for me

Free bus passes for over the 60s but this looks to be ruined if the means tested element comes in

I dont like nanny state government interferance in personal choices but the ban on smoking advertisements and the smoking ban was a couragious move for the long term good of the health of the nation I am a smoker myself but credit for this bold move for me

I despise labour but credit for the above they deserve