That ‘horrible man’ Tony Blair introduced Hunting Act to appease back benchers,’ says farmer

A farmer accused of encouraging illegal fox hunting has claimed the ‘tiny proportion’ of convicted huntsmen had the ‘evidence stacked against them’.

Mark Hankinson, 60, the Director of the Masters of the Foxhounds Association, said many of the convictions under the Hunting Act 2004 were wrong.

Wearing a grey pinstripe suit and polka-dot tie, Hankinson told Westminster Magistrates’ Court: ‘If I may put it into some perspective, there are nearly 250 registered packs of hounds in England, Scotland and Wales that formerly hunted foxes, stags, whatever.

‘If one takes into account how many days hunting they do per year, each of those packs, and if we roughly say over the last 15 years since the ban that comes to well over one million day’s hunting.

‘To the best of my knowledge I think barely a dozen huntsmen have been found guilty in a court for breaking the Hunting Act.

‘This is a tiny proportion and I suspect many of those are not guilty but the evidence has been stacked against them.

‘I’m not denigrating the law’

Gregory Gordon, prosecuting, said: ‘Are you sure you’re not denigrating the law? It sounds like you are.’

Hankinson, denies encouraging illegal fox-hunting, outlawed under the Hunting Act 2004, in two webinars between 11-13 August last year.

According to Hankinson, his advice during the two invite-only webinars was intended to ‘help educate our members and to enforce the need for proper practice.’

Yesterday, the court was shown two video recordings in which Hankinson outlines various exemptions to the Hunting Act.

In the first webinar, on 11 August 2020, Hankinson said: ‘If you’ve got saboteurs out with you in any shape or form we need to have clear, visible, plausible trail laying being done throughout the day.’

Gordon put it to Hankinson that the word ‘plausible’ suggested this was to encourage people to ‘make it look like you are doing the job properly even though you aren’t’.

Hankinson said: ‘No, they are laying trails properly. All I am saying is that we need proper evidence of that for when they are being scrutinised by malicious opponents.’

The court also saw, in the second webinar, on 13 August 2020, Hankinson say: ‘That nasty man Tony Blair introduced [The Hunting Act] to try and get the backbenchers off his back and it is widely regarded as one of the worst bits of legislation ever.

‘We need to understand it and its exemptions, and how to manage it.

‘It’s effectively illegal to hunt a wild mammal with more than two dogs but you will see there’s quite a few exemptions.

‘So obviously trail-hunting, which is our main card, is a critical one.

Mr Gordon challenged Hankinson on his use of the phrase ‘main card’, suggesting it referred to ‘a game you’re playing, you’re encouraging the manipulation of the process.’

Hankinson, becoming increasingly terse, simply answered ‘It’s a figure of speech’.

Mr Gordon argued the defence had ‘made up’ the ‘lie’ about the dummy trails and the saboteurs in order to ‘cheat the courts’.

Richard Lissack, QC, for Hankinson, asked his client whether he had any personal experience of ‘saboteurs’.

Hanksinon told the court: ‘I cannot remember if it was 2008 or 2009 but it was the first Saturday of November in Kitt’s Wood in Wilton country when I suddenly had the hoard of masked, black-clad people, blowing horns, playing hunting music on speakers, upsetting my hounds, frightening the children, intimidating people and then they pulled by whipper off his horse and assaulted him.

‘I left poor Robin [the whipper] on the ground, people helping him, and got the hounds together and disappeared with them as quickly as I could in a direction I thought they couldn’t follow.’

Lissack also asked Hankinson to tell the court the impact of the allegations against him for the hunting community.

Hankinson said: ‘It has been extremely detrimental.

‘The many institutional large landowners, understandably concerned by the allegations, have suspended permission for hunts to operate there which is certainly a detriment.’

A number of major landowners, including the National Trust, the Lake District National Park, and Forestry England, suspended hunting on their land at the end of last year, pending the outcome of Mr Hankinson’s case.

Hankinson agreed that this impact could be ‘terminal’ for a hunt, leading to loss of jobs and livelihoods.

When invited to share the impact the allegations have had on him personally, Hanskinson, visibly upset, said: ‘Do I have to?’

Hankinson was charged after footage from the webinars was obtained by hunt saboteurs, who passed it to the media and the police.

On Monday, the first day of trial, Lissack argued the recordings were obtained by the Hunt Sabotage Association illegally but Deputy Senior District Judge Tan Ikram refused an application to exclude the evidence.

The case against Hankinson is brought by the League Against Cruel Sports, who staged a third day of protesting outside the court.

Hankinson, of Frampton Farm, Sherborne, Dorset, denies one count of intentionally encouraging the commission of a summary offence, which carries the maximum penalty of an unlimited fine.

The trial continues.
mfl