Letter to the Speaker of the House of Commons

Download PDF

MM.1

The Rt Hon Michael Martin
Speaker of the House
House of Commons
Westminster
London, SW1A 0AA

14th November 2004

Dear Mr Speaker,

The Hunting Bill - Proof of Least Suffering in Hunting - False Accusations - The Invocation of the Parliament Acts - An Inquiry

The combined resources of the Commons and the Lords in their deliberations, on what for many good British people is one of the most important and disturbing legislative issues of their lifetime, has demonstrated a majority of 479 over 413 against a hunt ban.

This supports the proof of least suffering in hunting, which I have presented to the Burns Inquiry, and to the Ministers Michael O'Brien, Elliot Morley, and Alun Michael. The truth is established by measuring, setting parameters and comparing suffering, between hunting and shooting methods. The simple overwhelming message in support of hunting methods, is laid out in the Welfare Equation, and other attached documents and photographs marked A for hunting and B for shooting.

Other important documentary evidence is attached, which confirms the credibility of my evidence and my statements to you. This supports my request that a proper inquiry be held to resolve the fact that our Parliament and the public have been deliberately misled on a number of important issues, by the three above Ministers, and that a hunting ban would be an unjust abuse of Parliamentary procedures.

The most fundamental principle of our long standing, unwritten, triumvirate, common sense based Constitution, requires the checks and balances of informed debate, and above all, the avoidance of an abuse of power by the Crown, the Commons or the Lords. Those of us who followed the debates in both Houses will recognise that only in the Lords was there an informed and credible debate, and that the Commons unwisely believe that they are entitled to overrule the Lords conclusions.

The Parliament Acts have no relevance in placating a petulant majority in the Commons, who have failed to produce a reasoned argument backed by research to support their case. They have made, what are in reality, false accusations of causing unnecessary suffering against well regulated practitioners and participants, who deploy hunting methods nationwide, in the control and management of deer, fox, hare and mink.

Under the most ancient and competent common law, the Edicts of Anu and Enlil, false accusation was considered to be as serious a crime as theft and murder. This age old wisdom should be properly addressed.

I am sure you will recognise the gravity and risks attached the current confrontational intentions of the Commons. The resulting frustration, anger, hostility, and intent to declare war on bad Government, by British people, is I believe justified. The ancient Britons regarded their working dogs with the same affection as their children. Too many good people have now had all they can take from old Labour prejudices and ignorance on this, and the hostile, un-costed policies, which are putting Britain out of business. The Commons are promoting cruelty and preventing kindness on a grand scale. This is totally unacceptable.

It is also relevant that the animal rights organisations, which include the RSPCA, who have acted in concert, and led the campaign to ban hunting, in failing to produce a reasoned argument backed by research for their campaigns, have been acquiring funds fraudulently from the British public. Can there be any lower form of life than those who put politics before the best interests of our precious wildlife ?

Many of the members of the House of Commons by their un-informed and defamatory statements against participants and practitioners in hunting, have thereby been complicit in the fraudulent acquisition of funds from the public by these animal rights organisations. This also includes the acquisition of research expenses for MP's, and donations to the Labour party, all specifically to further unsound, unscientific, and unjust anti-hunt aims, by a raft of animal rights pressure groups.

You will see from the correspondence, that I have taken part at every stage of the Burns Inquiry and many other Government Consultations. My primary complaint is that having provided proof of least suffering, my evidence failed to reach research contractors, and has been buried at every opportunity by Government officials, and Ministers.

My letters, e-mails, questions, and requests for meetings on behalf of some 150,000 workers in the wildlife management industry remain unanswered.

I would like to have my complaints heard, and the opportunity to demonstrate to you, that Ministers Elliot Morley, Alun Michael and Michael O'Brien have misled Parliament and the public, and have deliberately obstructed the processes of good government. They have also been a party to the provision of false and fabricated evidence purporting to claim that soft temperament scent hounds attack deer.

Yours sincerely,

Edmund Marriage - British Wildlife Management

cc. Tony Blair, Roger Sands, Roger Daw, and all other interested parties.