Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Jane Stevenson
Main Page: Jane Stevenson (Conservative - Wolverhampton North East)Department Debates - View all Jane Stevenson's debates with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill
Jane Stevenson ExcerptsFriday 17th March 2023
(1 year, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill 2022-23 View all Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill 2022-23 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Consideration of Bill Amendments as at 17 March 2023 - (17 Mar 2023)
Jane Stevenson (Wolverhampton North East) (Con)
I think some of the statistics that I have been sent around the Bill have been produced, on both sides, from a position of bias. Is it not the case that we should not pander to a table that we have been sent that is obviously from a hunting lobby or animal rights activist? We need to get to somewhere sensible, in the middle, where we can consider the issue. A lot of my hon. Friend’s points are obviously using the statistics from one side, but dismissing those of the other.
Sir Bill Wiggin
To be fair, I have not used many statistics, because I fully agree with my hon. Friend. This was analysis done on statements made by Members in the debate, myself included. If 70% were factually incorrect or misleading, then who judges that? Obviously, the people to judge it are experts and the experts should be peer reviewed, acknowledged and acceptable to everybody. That is why new clause 4, which I think is important, allows the Government to have access to agreed experts. That will be much more helpful and factually useful, and may take some of the emotion out of what is a very emotional subject.