I’ve been wondering which members of parliament are likely to speak in favour of driven grouse shooting in the debate on the subject. Their constituents might well want to give them some Firm Briefing on the facts of the matter and to give them the views of the people who elected them.
The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Shooting (and Conservation – ho! ho!) seemed to be a good place to start to find some contenders.
First, a word about APPGs: there are lots and lots of them, on all sorts of different subjects, from ‘Afghanistan‘ to ‘Zimbabwe‘ and from ‘22q11 syndrome‘ to ‘zoroastrianism‘. They are like clubs at school or societies at university – a place where people with similar interests can find each other and interact outside of ‘real work’. Of course, if you are an MP showing interest in, let’s say, the Bahamas, you might find that you get an occasional trip to that location, a fact-finding trip, will be paid for so that you can pursue your interest.
Membership of an APPG doesn’t necessarily mean that you are interested in the subject – but it often does. The reason it doesn’t always is in the ‘A’ of APPG. To get one of these groups set up you need to show cross party interest and so there is a certain amount of swapping of favours which goes on – ‘We’re looking for a LibDem for our APPG – you couldn’t possibly sign up could you please? We won’t make you do anything!’.
But the APPG on Shooting (and Conservation Ho! Ho!) still seemed a good place to spot the potential strong advocates of grouse shooting. Here is its home page.
You’ll notice that BASC provides the group’s secretariat (and there is nothing wrong with that) and also provides the group’s Public Enquiry Point. Well I’m a member of the public and I had an enquiry: I’d like to know which MPs were members of the group. When I asked, the response I got from the Public Enquiry Point was that ‘All information about the all (sic) All-Party Parliamentary Groups can be found on the parliamentary website: http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/apg/’. Except, it seems, who are members of the group. I didn’t find the Public Enquiry point very helpful really.
Watch this space.
PS What are APPGs form the parliament website:
‘As well as taking part in formal parliamentary business, MPs are active in other areas such as within their own political parties and constituencies. They may also take part in informal work at Westminster, such as working with All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs).
APPGs are informal cross-party groups that have no official status within Parliament. They are run by and for Members of the Commons and Lords, though many choose to involve individuals and organisations from outside Parliament in their administration and activities.’
[registration_form]
Interesting to see that Calum Kerr, SNP, MP for Berwickshire Roxburgh and Selkirk is listed as Co-Treasurer of APPG. Scottish Borders have had a number of poisoning/shooting/trapping incidents over the last couple of years. Be interested hear what his response was to any constituents writing to him about the Petition!
Given some of the statements made by BASC is there a potential conflict of interest in their involvement with any parliamentary debate? By all means they might be invited to offer ‘evidence’, that is to say robust and factual science to support any anecdotal marketing spin?
Yes, but conservation of what …. certainly not a balanced ecosystem on the uplands. Long standing tradition of hook and claw eradication behind a facade of ‘conservation’? But some might suggest that would also apply to the G[WC]T?
I’ve sent a request for a list of members to their public enquiry point and then done the same for another entirely unrelated group to see if their responses are similar. I’ll report back.
Well, I got the same reply from the unrelated group and upon further enquiry was tld that ‘APPGs don’t publish lists anymore – change of Parliamentary rules’. There is more information at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmallparty/160831/register-160831.pdf
So we aren’t going to find out who’s on the group – I suppose you could ask the chair.
Must be part of the drive (no pun intended) towards open, transparent and accountable government that works for the many not just the few?
Nothing to hide so why are these ‘quaint’ practices maintained in dark corners out of the public gaze?
Given the astonishing figure of £4bn for a make over (for a piece of expensive real estate that has been allowed to get into disrepair by its inhabitants and civil servants servicing them) at a time public services continue to be cut through to the marrow. Let’s take the opportunity to review need and cull say a third of the 650 + 850? We don’t have enough doctors and nurses, forgive me for asking but do we really need 1,500 politicians?
Not surprising that BASC haven’t the resources to properly resource the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Shooting (and Conservation – ho! ho!) Public Enquiry Point. They have more important internal issues to address:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/aug/28/basc-britain-shooting-lobby-infighting
[Mark – read the Guardian article before posting this, if indeed you do. The language is colourful to say the least. You may well already be aware of this and have chosen to keep out of it or save it til later]
The email address of the Public Enquiry Point for the All Party Parliamentary Group on Shooting and Conservation appears to be that of the BASC Political Affairs Manager, Sophie Hutchinson.
“Date of most recent AGM in this Parliament – 02/06/2015” – can we see the minutes?
“Did the group publish an income and expenditure statement relating to the AGM above? – No”. Why the **** not?!