King’s Speech
Lord Herbert of South Downs Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 days ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Herbert of South Downs (Con)
My Lords, I draw attention to my entries in the register of Members’ interests as chairman of the Countryside Alliance and related positions, and I add my congratulations to the noble Lord, Lord Hobby, and my noble friend Lord Blackwater on their fine maiden speeches.
On Thursday, the Gambling Commission will decide whether to approve the rollout of affordability checks on online betting. When the previous Government announced these checks three years ago, Ministers said they should be totally frictionless. The pilots have not been. Immense damage has been done to horseracing already, and to what effect? Betters resent intrusive checks and are driven to the black market. Racing loses revenue, an estimated £250 million over five years, and so in turn does the Treasury. While I appreciate the potential harm of other forms of gambling, betting on racing is simply not in the same league. The risks are akin to those of playing National Lottery scratchcards. Should these be restricted, too? There has been no proper evaluation of the affordability pilots, and it appears that the checks will be green-lighted with no parliamentary debate or scrutiny. Affordability checks are directly contrary to the Government’s declared support for racing, so I urge the Culture Secretary to step in now and revisit an ill-targeted policy which, after all, was not the Government’s in the first place.
When racing is damaged, so too is the rural economy. I wonder whether the Government understand how rural communities feel about successive policies that have been directed at them. First, we had affordability checks; then we had the family farm tax, which had to be partially reversed after a year of protest; and then, out of the blue, we had an extraordinary plan in the land use framework to license game shooting. Now we have a proposed ban on trail hunting. Tony Blair’s Government faced enough opposition when they forced through the hunting ban, but they were not so unwise as to attack racing, the nation’s second most popular spectator sport, farming and shooting at the same time.
When Members of Parliament so obviously face a mortal challenge from Reform UK, these unforced assaults on rural voters are not just bad policy; they are inexplicably bad politics too. Twenty years ago, Ministers justified the abolition of hunting by telling people they could hunt trails instead. Now, this Government want to ban this activity too, on the grounds that it risks the pursuit of animals. But this is already a criminal offence. Outlawing the following of an artificial trail is akin to banning cars to prevent speeding. It is illiberal, disproportionate and completely out of step with voter priorities.
After the local elections, there is much talk of a reset, and I hesitate to intrude on the bloodsport of leadership challenge, but I offer this suggestion for future policy. There are enough real problems in the country and the countryside to address without creating new ones. The job of DCMS is to back sport, not to undermine it; the job of Defra is to support rural communities, not to attack them; and the job of the Government is surely to improve people’s lives, not to behave like new Puritans, telling everyone what they can and cannot do. The gracious Speech committed the Government to promote the British values of tolerance and respect for difference. That respect should extend to rural communities, and I suggest that freedom is foremost among British values too.