MPs gamble over hunting ban

all land belonging to Brighton and Hove Council.

The policy was approved without fuss and the pursuit was outlawed. Today, 23 years later, he will vote to extend that ban to the rest of England and Wales.

The outcome will be far less simple. The Brighton Pavilion MP and his colleagues in the anti-hunt lobby will be entering into a high-stakes game of poker.

In the last few days, Downing Street has been turning up the heat by warning the legislation could be badly delayed if the MPs insist on amending the Government's Hunting Bill to ban the practice outright.

Tony Blair and his Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael want their compromise - described by critics as a "dreadful fudge" - to become law.

As it stands, the Bill would ban deer hunting and hare coursing outright but allow fox hunting to continue under licence where it is needed for pest control, or "utility", and there is no less cruel alternative.

This would effectively outlaw lowland hunting in Sussex, but crucially Mr Blair would be able to argue it was tough but fair.

He believes this would at least limit protests from within the countryside movement while giving his MPs what they seek in all but name.

Mr Blair has tried to buy-off the anti-hunt lobby by toughening the Bill. Last week Mr Michael announced the length of the chase will have to be kept as short as possible.

But it did not work and 145 MPs, including Mr Lepper and Brighton Kemptown's Des Turner, tabled the outright ban amendment.

So the Government switched to another tactic. Leader of the Commons Peter Hain was instructed to warn the Bill might have to undergo a second round of line-by-line examination in a standing committee if the amendment was passed as it would be deemed to have been significantly altered.

The Bill would then lose its slot in the House of Lords next month and would be put on hold as it must be presented to the Lords at least one month before the end of the current parliamentary session in November to allow the Government to invoke the Parliament Act.

It was a quite blatant piece of political arm-twisting or, as one Government source said, "incentivising".

But this has not worked on Mr Turner or Mr Lepper either. Mr Lepper told The Argus: "I think the Commons has made its view clear several times and it is time the final decision was taken. All the people I have spoken to feel the same.

"One or two of my constituents have said to me if a partial ban was all they could get they would support that but most of them want the outright ban.

"I get many letters from people who lived in the Sussex countryside before moving to Brighton and have seen the cruelty of hunting."

Mr Lepper, who said he had not come under any direct pressure from Labour whips, was not put off by Mr Hain's warning.

"I'm sure a timetable could be worked out to get the Bill through in this Parliamentary session. But if it is a case of taking a bit longer and getting it right, I think we should take that time," he said.

Mr Turner said the whips may be able to put pressure on the pay-role vote - about 100 Ministers and their Parliamentary aides. But the remaining Labour MPs would not take a blind bit of notice, making the outright ban almost certain to win.

He added: "The Government Bill is better than nothing but I think it is a dreadful fudge and we would have to keep coming back to the issue time and again. If there is an implied threat that if we vote for an amendment, it will stop the Bill, I think that is empty.

"We now have the provision of bringing the Bill back in the next Parliamentary session.

"It is important to get it through in this Parliament (before the next General Election), but I would rather wait six months and do it properly."

Mr Turner stressed the crunch issue was whether the Government would honour its pledge to use the Parliament Act to force the Bill through the Lords.

All the indications are it will invoke the Act as the Government fears the backlash a U-turn would create from MPs and the grassroots party.

Lewes Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker may vote in favour of the Bill, rather than an outright ban, in the hope it may get through the Lords without the Act being needed.

Mr Baker, his party's environment spokesman and a champion of animal rights, said: "I think Alun Michael has played a clever game by basing his Bill on principles of cruelty and utility. That has made it much more difficult for the House of Lords to reject.

"There is some poker playing going on here. I do not want to see the Bill being carried into another session so there is a judgement to be made."

Sussex's Tory MPs will vote against the Bill and the amendment. Mid Sussex MP Nicolas Soames said depriving people of the right to take part in hunting would be a "deeply damaging day for all our freedoms".

He said: "Most of the hunts in Britain today are well over 100 years old. They have a tremendous pride in their traditions and their contribution to the life of the countryside and to its conservation. Many of them play a vital role in the life of hard-pressed rural communities."

But the Tories are out of what is a battle of nerve between Labour MPs and their Government.