Results 1-20 of 616 for hunting speaker:James Gray

Written Answers — Environment Food and Rural Affairs: Foot and Mouth Disease: Hunting (18 Oct 2007)

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) for what reasons trail and drag hunting is prohibited in foot and mouth disease low risk areas; (2) whether there are biosecurity hazards associated with trail and drag hunting; (3) when he will allow trail and drag hunting on foot and mouth disease (a) low risk and (b) risk areas.

Written Answers — Defence: Salisbury Plain: Hunting (18 Oct 2007)

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether trail and drag hunting is permitted on the Salisbury Plain Training Area.

Oral Answers to Questions — Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Wild Birds (10 Feb 2005)

Mr James Gray: ...of wild bird populations that the Minister described in his answer, but we remain concerned about some of the species that are still being heavily predated. Will he explain why it is that under the Hunting Act 2004 dogs may still be used for the protection of pheasants, grouse and partridge, but not for the protection of corn buntings and turtle doves?

Farming and Rural Communities (19 Jan 2005)

Mr James Gray: ..., the hon. Member for Wantage (Mr. Jackson). I hope that his strong support for the war in Iraq and top-up fees, his views on the European Union and the single currency and his strong support for hunting make him very welcome on the Labour Benches, but I suspect that the description, "about as popular as myxomatosis in a rabbit hutch", applies as much to him as it does to the Minister....

Farming and Rural Communities (19 Jan 2005)

Mr James Gray: The Minister seems to be fixated on hunting. Why is he talking about hunting when the motion does not refer to it, my hon. Friend the Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) did not mention it and it has not been raised at all during the debate? Why is he so fixated on banging on about it?

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...proposed 18 months it was not for animal welfare reasons; it had about it the stench of political expediency. They wanted to allow the ban to come into force after the general election and for hunting not to become an issue in that general election. In that context, Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you that a number of my right hon. and hon. Friends, and indeed people in the countryside, are,...

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...re-homing hounds is extraordinarily absurd. We need to find a way to reuse the hounds. The animal welfare committee in this House proposed that, for example, they might be exported to take part in hunting overseas. That is an absurd suggestion.

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...the report it produced has been rubbished, to use that common new Labour word, by a variety of learned people, including the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. The truth of the matter is that if hunting were banned within three months there would be a significant problem over what to do with hounds. I think everybody agrees with that.

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: My hon. Friend makes an extremely good point, which I shall discuss in a moment. On the subject of horses, the British Horse Society makes it plain that an immediate or early ban on hunting will have significant consequences for horses. Mr. Cory says: "Horses bred mainly or solely for hunting are not pets . . . By temperament and conformation, these are strong and vigorous animals . . . To...

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...each other, but the interesting thing is that he came to only one absolutely clear, absolutely plain and totally agreed conclusion, which is that by no stretch of anybody's imagination could drag hunting replicate hunting at the moment. That is a unanimous opinion in respect of the notion that those horses and hounds could be used for drag hunting. There is a more interesting point here,...

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...will be joined in the streets and in the countryside too. Mass protests, civil disobedience within the law and political campaigning of every kind will be unleashed. I appeal to the supporters of hunting and of freedom to remain within the law at all times, to abhor violence or intimidation of any kind, and to seek to avoid inconveniencing the general public, most of whom support our cry...

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...soap opera in which ignorant urban interests triumph over the countryside. For a few moments last night, I was glad that this would be the last time that I rose at this Dispatch Box to discuss hunting—[Interruption.]

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It then occurred to me that although this is the last time that I will rise at this Dispatch Box to discuss hunting, I can look forward to the opportunity this time next year of rising at the Government Dispatch Box as the Minister responsible for proposing the repeal of this disgraceful, prejudiced and ignorant little Bill. Last night, when she moved the amendments in...

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...Mallalieu said that the Bill was a badly drafted measure, which "allows terrier work . . . in order to protect a pheasant or a partridge but not to protect a lamb or a curlew, which allows the hunting of rats but not mice, rabbits but not hares; which destroys jobs . . . homes . . . and does so without compensation".—[ Official Report, House of Lords, 17 November 2004; Vol. 666, c....

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: I fear that the hon. Gentleman is right. The Bill is badly drafted and even if, like so many Labour Members, one were committed to abolishing hunting, the measure is not the way to do it. It will not work; it will prove impossible to police; its definitions are difficult to understand—it is extraordinarily badly drafted. I therefore believe that we shall have to revert to it.

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (18 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ...1998. That will be tested in the courts. He also makes a good point about hare coursing, which is, bizarrely, singled out for an immediate ban. Hare coursing kills fewer hares than shooting or hare hunting, which would be allowed. It would be delayed for three years if the Minister's amendment were passed. However, hare coursing, which aims not to kill hares, would be banned in three months.

Points of Order (17 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: ..., Mr. Speaker. Last night, the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Home Secretary and 18 of their colleagues who were able to get into the Lobby with them voted against an outright ban on hunting. Is there any precedent in the long history of the Parliament Act for it to be used to force through a Bill, against which the holders of the great offices of state and the leader of the...

Hunting Bill: Clause 1 — Hunting wild mammals with dogs (16 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: That is not what Professor Bateson said. If the Minister is so certain that there is no chance that deer hunting will pass the test as defined in the Bill, why not leave it to the registrar to turn it down?

Hunting Bill: Clause 1 — Hunting wild mammals with dogs (16 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: My hon. Friend knows what he is talking about and I have seen him on Exmoor. There is no reason why farmers would allow herds of deer to roam across their farms were it not for their support for the hunt. The Minister has consistently refused to come up with any alternative red deer management programme to replace hunting. The second series of amendments from the other place, about which we...

Hunting Bill: Clause 1 — Hunting wild mammals with dogs (16 Nov 2004)

Mr James Gray: I am extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his support, which is especially important, as he has recently suffered from an ignorant and prejudiced ban on hare hunting in Northern Ireland, for all the wrong reasons and with no scientific evidence whatever. We entirely support him on that.