What's irrelevant to some...

Tweet Faced with questions about the issue which must not be mentioned, it seems that the Hunting Party Tory candidate for this constituency described the issue as being "completely irrelevant to the overwhelming majority of people".

That's not really surprising - he has form on this. He has in the past claimed that there are 1001 issues more important to rural areas than hunting. Just for a change, I agree with him on both these statements.

There is a 'but', however.

Irrelevant it may be to most of the people living here, but it is not irrelevant to the candidate, despite his strenuous efforts to avoid mentioning it. What he cannot escape from is that the local Conservative Association was taken over by pro-hunters with the specific intention of selecting a pro-hunting candidate; that the campaign is very generously funded by people whose sole political objective is the repeal of the Hunting Act, and that much of the human resources (instructed not to mention the subject of hunting) for the campaign is being provided by an organisation specifically set up to promote the election of pro-hunting candidates.

In addition, the candidate's biography as published in his election material and in local newspapers seems to consistently omit his ten year period as a Master of Foxhounds.

The reason the issue is not going to go away is not because Simon Hart is a supporter of hunting; he's perfectly entitled to hold that view and campaign for it. It's rather because of the lack of openness and transparency about the objectives of the Tories' campaign. They'd be better off simply being open with people.