Brian May and "endorsement" of political parties

[miss_s_b]

So I saw a tweet yesterday which mentioned Brian May was campaigning for the Labour party, and decided to look further into it today. I am relieved to report that it's not quite that simple. He was campaigning alongside a Labour candidate on Saturday, in favour of a single issue campaign on blood"sports" which he is running, mainly focussing on the Hunting Act, but also on badger culls and other bloodsport-related matters. He says on his blog (which is STILL not RSSable - ARGH! LOL) that he is supporting ANY candidate from ANY party who pledges to support the Ban on hunting.

My personal view on the hunting act is that it's a shoddy and unworkable piece of legislation which needs serious amending, but that things would probably be worse if it were repealed. The hunting act itself, therefore, is not massively important to me one way or the other. HOWEVER, the Tory plans to stop vaccinating badgers against bovine TB and cull them instead is something I am furious about. Badgers are not the SOURCE of bovine TB, they are the VICTIMS of it, and killing badgers does not stop cows giving each other TB (although I'll grant that it stops the cows giving the badgers TB because they are dead). All it does is kill badgers. I am therefore, like our awesome parliamentary candidate Hilary Myers, going to get behind this campaign.

If this is the kind of thing you feel strongly about there's a website which I am quelling the urge to critique for navigability and the inevitable facebook group.

Comments

[nannyo.livejournal.com]

In fact, the other thing the badger cull does is increase transmission, because it means that the badgers who USED to live in an area no longer do, so young badgers on a hunt for territory think it's a lovely place to live, and move on in. Thus, instead of one lot of badgers getting TB, now strange and distant badgers get it after badgers the first are killed.

It is SUCH a dubious bit of science.

[miss_s_b]

A prime example of policy-based evidence selection, instead of evidence based policy making.

[bagfish]

My major negative issue with Tim Farron is that he supports the badger cull which makes me very sad because the scientific evidence for its effectiveness is just not there. He seems to imply in these articles that the Lib Dems as a whole will support the badger cull.

http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/livestock/livestock-news/lib-dems-will-not-dodge-badger-cull/31463.article

http://www.westmorlandandlonsdalelibdems.org.uk/news/000918/lib_dems_pledge_to_introduce_badger_cull_in_response_to_tb_crisis.html

Do you have any further info about what the Lib Dems' stance on badger culling actually is?

[miss_s_b]

I didn't know that about Tim. That makes me sad. I don't know if we have an official party policy. The only Lib Dem I know who has made a big fuss about it one way or the other is Peter Black, who campaigned vigourously against it in Wales.

[addyit.livejournal.com]

ugh.

just dancing around the REAL problem, as usual.... that is, bovine TB. why not research the effort into what can be done about it? invest in treatments, or.... OMG.... VACCINES?!

i can see why they want to cull the disease before badgers spread it to other animals.... but the source will STILL be there, and still be improperly investigated and treated... and, these bugs have a habit of being able to survive, and will still spread to other animals.

it's disgusting!