Results 1-20 of 150 for hunting speaker:Lembit Öpik

Written Answers — Environment Food and Rural Affairs: Animal Welfare (21 Feb 2008)

Lembit Öpik: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps his Department has taken to monitor the effect on animal welfare of the Hunting Act 2004 over the last three years; and if he will make a statement.

Orders of the Day — Government of Wales Bill — [3rd Allotted Day]: Schedule 7 — Acts of the Assembly (30 Jan 2006)

Lembit Öpik: Amendment No. 33 makes sense to us on purely devolutionary grounds. I accept that there were different views on whether hunting with dogs should be curtailed, but—leaving aside the position that each of us took at the time—surely anyone who feels that Wales should have parity with Scotland in terms of powers will recognise that the matter was devolved to the Scottish Parliament....

Orders of the Day — Government of Wales Bill (9 Jan 2006)

Lembit Öpik: ...;he will be considerably missed in the other place, where he was active until December—and to Tony Banks, with whom I had considerable interactions, particularly on the vexatious issue of fox hunting. Irrespective of whether I agreed with him, I think that the House can agree that he made a difference and left an indelible mark on parliamentary matters, and to that extent, British...

Hunting Act 2004 (11 Jan 2005)

Mr Lembit Öpik: The Minister hopes for clarity on the law, and I agree. Can he confirm that after the date of commencement, whenever it turns out to be, exempt hunting, drag hunting, exercising hounds, chasing away, searching and unintentional hunting will continue to be legal?

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

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...about animal welfare. The hon. Member for West Ham (Mr. Banks) said on 24 November 2003: "It is not a matter of great significance in . . . animal welfare, but it has become totemic." A ban on hunting with dogs is not about public opinion. The majority of people are opposed to criminalising those who go hunting with dogs. Frankly, if we are going to ban things and the majority of people...

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

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...has been more irritating than the almost visceral unwillingness of those who favour a ban to entertain even the slight possibility that there is evidence-based research to show that a ban on hunting with dogs will increase suffering in the countryside, not reduce it. I have worked hard to convince the public and hon. Members that ours is the right way to go, as have my colleagues in other...

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

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...the amended Bill proposed by the hon. Member for West Ham (Mr. Banks), even if I disagree with his conclusions, but I would be grateful for clarification. Given that he has chosen to exclude stag hunting from the tests but to include fox hunting, is it fair to conclude that there are likely to be cases in which hunting with dogs or foxes is not necessarily cruel?

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (15 Sep 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: Does the hon. Lady agree that the evidence is cast iron that a ban on hunting with dogs will increase animal suffering, not reduce it? The baying and criticism from Labour Members does not undermine the fact that we have looked at the evidence and they have not. The greatest tragedy of all is that the ban is based on emotion and prejudice, not on fact and logic.

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (15 Sep 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the technical points that he is making seem to have been lost on those who are imposing this time limit? Similar problems occur in areas where hunting with dogs is the primary fox control method, because not only will new materials have to be used to control foxes but there will have to be fresh training and adaptation. Lord Burns himself said that fox...

Orders of the Day — Hunting Bill (15 Sep 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: I am sure that it was a slip of the tongue, but the Minister referred to the "cruelty" involved in hunting with dogs. That is at the core of the debate. To date, I have understood that he has accepted that there is room for discussion about that. Presumably, he will now assure us that simply because his Bill has been usurped his views have not. I hope that he will confirm that he still feels...

Hunting Bill (Procedure) (15 Sep 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ..., we can look at the arguments in the same detail as we do in Committee. If we do not look at them, we shall end up with a defective Bill that does not even achieve what those in favour of a ban on hunting with dogs want. Let us bear it in mind that the Bill does not ban hunting with dogs; it bans the hunting of foxes and stags with dogs, but not the hunting of rabbits or rats. I really...

Hunting Bill (Procedure) (15 Sep 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ..., does the hon. Gentleman agree that the great problem with the procedure that we are being offered is that it will squeeze out opportunities to present convincing arguments to people who support hunting? We have neither the space nor the time to do that. As we know that the country has been persuaded to oppose the ban, there is some hope that, through the use of proper procedure, at least...

Hunting Bill (Procedure) (15 Sep 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...than simply seeking vengeance. The problem with the procedure motion is that it does not allow space for us to examine the Bill's flaws in detail. It is in the interests of those who want to ban hunting with dogs to have a good Bill that works rather than one that does not work for want of proper scrutiny.

Public Bill Committee: Promotion of Volunteering Bill: Clause 2 - Statements of Inherent Risk (19 May 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...this element of the Bill was that it would increase litigation, at least in the short term. I am quite encouraged by that, because I assume that the Government will therefore oppose a ban on fox hunting as that will unquestionably increase litigation. I assume also that they will oppose ID cards because an enormous raft of litigation will come with them. They should also oppose their own...

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill (6 Feb 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: The answer to the Minister is simple. I did not dwell on the 1996 Act because it is obvious what the Bill does; it takes away the exclusion for hunting and shooting. That is self-explanatory. If the Minister is so sure of his position, why is he not willing to allow the question of suffering in hunting and so forth to be tested in court? He must accept that his Bill from the previous Session,...

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill (6 Feb 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...My Bill would amend the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, which gave limited protection to wild mammals by way of a list of proscribed actions. However, it explicitly excluded any form of lawful hunting and shooting. Because I care about animal welfare, I believe it is time to create a level playing field for all activities involved in the management of wild animals. Unlike any Bill on...

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill (6 Feb 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: Yes; the hon. Gentleman should examine all the information that I have put out. This is an encompassing Bill to try to find a level playing field. It includes the question of hunting with dogs, but it does so in a way that has already been tried and tested in British law. The starting point for the Bill is the Government's own Burns inquiry. Everyone agreed that we had an effective and...

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill (6 Feb 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...the inquiry, which was profoundly important to those of us in this discussion who are evidence-led rather than prejudice-led. I shall address the Minister's point by comparing our Bill with the Hunting Bill. The fundamental difference is that we have tried to take a strategic and all-encompassing approach to the question of wild mammal protection. My Bill would prohibit all undue suffering...

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill (6 Feb 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...to the hon. Gentleman, because he has not been in his place from the start of the debate. My Bill would judge all activities used for the control of all wild mammals on their individual merits. The Hunting Bill would not have affected any other form of killing wild animals, such as snaring, trapping, poisoning or shooting. Let us not forget that it was the Minister himself who believed...

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill (6 Feb 2004)

Mr Lembit Öpik: ...Cruelty to Animals nor the League Against Cruel Sports takes the same view. They will not support the Bill, and that raises a serious question about their true aims. Do they regard the banning of hunting with dogs as being more important than improving animal welfare, or do they feel so concerned about their arguments in favour of banning hunting with dogs that they do not believe that...