http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/news/articles/508.html

Guests - this sponsored link will vanish when you log-in. Click here to register for free.

So Peter, what do they really mean? Have we been visited by the devil himself?

Not biting on this one. I've been on the seafishing forum. They actually talk about fishing over there. Makes a change

I respect the CA for answering this one, it is only right and proper that they should.

We can all choose to read into this as best suits our own arguements and opinions.

It doesn't alter my opinion though, as you might expect.

I note that Charles Jardine's name is not on the press release.

I note that the CA doesn't deny attempting to help unseat such as Martin Salter MP. Neither does it say that the CA will target Tory MPs who voted for the Hunting With Dogs legislation.

As I said, its good that the CA has responded. To my way of thinking it strengthans, rather than weakens my resolve.

Salter's initial press release has been damaging, this latest CA reponse is a feeble attempt to lessen the damage. But I would say that, wouldn't I ?

Dear Sport,

So you are not biting on this one eh? I'm not either. Then again pigs might fly.

I quite liked the letter sent in to AN by Llin today. So much so I've copied and pasted it onto my post with comments in between.

"Dear Sir,

Martin Salter's vitriolic attack on the Alliance is neither accurate or justified - nor is it anything new."

But Pete Waller assured us all that the Countryside Alliance was involved? He even gloated about it positively almost beside himself that the Alliance were showing its "true" colours. Seems it isn’t true after all Pete. It’s very almost glaringly true however that a couple of FACT personalities galloped in to tell us all how great Martin Salter was! So exactly "WHO" is poking their noses into domestic politics then Pete? David Bird said “It would be a sad day for angling if he was not in the next parliament.” Terry Mansbridge said, "”We are disappointed that the Countryside Alliance has chosen to attack Martin in this way given that they purport to represent a large number of anglers." Well apparently they actually haven't Terry so can I respectfully ask David and Terry to furnish actual proof on here that the Countryside Alliance has done what they claim it has?? Llin has publically denied such a claim so come on guys; let’s have the proof that says otherwise?


"As an Ex Labour MP I accepted the position of Chairman of the Alliance's Campaign for Angling because of its politically neutral stance. But this should not be confused with an inability or unwillingness to express a view."

Blimey! How the hell did an ex labour MP get past Pete Waller’s sentry box? I mean, it can't be true surely that a labour MP ex or otherwise might actually support the CA. Unthinkable of course that an ex labour MP might actually be an officer in the Countryside Alliance!! Kind of dispels Peter's opinion that the Countryside Alliance is a Tory ruled anti-socialist bastion. Could the Countryside Alliance heaven forbid be made up of ordinary galls and guys?

"We condemned the Tories for suggesting they scrap rod licences and have welcomed Ben Bradshaw's sensible approach to the cormorant issue, and for our shooting friends his u-turn on Open General Licences for pigeons and crows."

Fair enough. I personally thought the Tories should have gone the whole hog and said stuff the rod licences cos we are going to stump up the money for EA fisheries and furthermore fund the agency as it should be funded so it can look after our environment properly. Cormorants? We are beginning to come unstuck here. Many who have applied for licenses to shoot cormorants are failing to send in their return forms so if the situation prevails, DEFRA will have no choice but to start revoking the licenses. Great. Everyone works hard to address the cormorant situation and the people who actually want to shoot the birds can't fill in a simple form on time.

"We have nearly 25,000 fisherman on our books and all of them want us to pursue an independent, proactive agenda for angling, that defends it from attack and champions its virtues. What is more we are happy to work with any organisation with complementary aims."

MOU Llin, what happened there then?

"We were part of the creation of the initiative 'Get Hooked on Fishing' (now a charity) and have managed to get our 'Water Matters' education pack to thousands of secondary schools in England and Wales. Our political operation in London, Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff (and Europe) scrutinises every piece of new legislation for anything that might - even accidentally - impinge on our sport."

So what’s wrong with that then all you CA knockers? Hardly the face of fox hunting high jacking angling is it?

"Where we freely admit to being a bit different from other pressure groups is that we represent country sports in the context of rural Britain as a whole, trying always to look at them all rather than as individuals. The separation of any of our activities from each other we believe is dangerous. Farming, land use, tourism, business, sport and the environment all overlap. Isolation brings with it only risk."

Ah hah. The nitty gritty. So the Countryside Alliance is a pressure group specifically aimed at representing country sports in the context of rural Britain as a whole then? Just so I've got this right Llin, isn't the CA all about fox hunting? I mean, if we are to believe the likes of Peter Waller, are all those other members of the Countryside Alliance daft then? You know, the ones that don’t actually have anything to do with fox hunting? Do they join the CA for window dressing or do they join because they believe in what the CA is doing for "them"?

"I find it a shame that Martin Salter chooses to ignore the Alliance in the many positive areas in which it is working for angling and shooting."

I actually think it’s a disgrace that any MP tasked with the job of being a government spokesman for angling chooses to ignore one section of angling because it suits “him” and not the best interests of the position they hold.

"The Alliance does not campaign for or against individuals or parties. What it does do is to encourage people to be part of the political process, and provides information to enable them to do that."

Exactly the same as all the other angling organisations do. How many times do we see angling encourage us all to sign petitions or write to MP's over this or that?

I have to say that I find the treatment the Countryside Alliance receives from angling "capos" and their "made men" rather disturbing. It’s quite obvious now what’s going off and I suspect a lot of anglers and angling organisations not connected to FACT might be starting to see through this propagandist fog.

All sections of UK society earn the right to have their voices listened to by MP's the moment they step into a ballot box. So if MP's start to listen to only those that wear the right cap badges then its time they stepped down in my opinion.

Regards,

Lee.

Llin Golding.

Golding, Golding, Golding...

Baroness Golding?

The same lady whose charity-donated tickets to the Commons' public / visitor's / whatever gallery found their way into the hands of some purple-powder-n-condom throwers (aka revolting F4J Dads) last year?

Lee, please just for once take your tongue out of your cheek.

I posted earlier that when compared to his predecessors, I felt Martin Salter has done a halfway decent job. I notice that nobody has argued that - yet a body whose commitment to angling issues on the most specious level wants the guy out over an issue not remotely connected to his brief as an MP and issue spokesman. I don't play party politics, they aren't worth it. But neither do I bite the hand that's made a decent job of feeding me.

MP's and ministers have only ever listened to those wearing the right badges, when it comes to the nitty gritty. Those running quango's on behalf of those who don't want to get their own hands dirty and delegate what was once civil service work to their own cliques and party whores seem to me to be even worse. Sport England and their funding settlement for angling comes rapidly to mind.

The rest is so much window dressing for individual CV's.

[ 14. March 2005, 09:35 PM: Message edited by: Alan Stubbs ]

Big sigh. Mods all over this one with itchy trigger fingers on the button. Hell I'm talking like Paul Boote now. Must remember to use more tobacco in the mix and roll it a little less tight.

'We can all choose to read into this as best suits our own arguments and opinions'

We won't Peter, however you will. The rest of us will JUST READ IT. If you choose to misrepresent or spin the contents of the letter then you do so at some risk of being seen to twist the truth, or at least the content of the letter. Even if a faction of the CA or any of the splinter groups had admitted to a campaign to unseat Martin Salter, then they would be perfectly within their right to do so. Yeh yeh I know, it's just not cricket... right its not, its politics.
What's of major concern to me, is that Martin Salter appears to have shunned a group that claims to represent 25,000 anglers. If this is true then he deserves to be unseated wouldnt you say Peter, or perhaps you take the view that since they all MUST be Tory voting anglers, then the scoundrels deserve everything they get. Perhaps Mr Salter is trying to run with the fox and hunt with the hounds (sorry...that just slipped out Joking aside, that for me is a serious issue. Martin Salter has built a fine reputation for ignoring mail and questions from individuals as you heard on the P&P forum, but ignoring anglers 25,000 at a time. Thats heavy stuff and this letter purely as a response to the Salter communique looks very much like the biter getting bit (right back)
I've figured out why you fear the CA Peter. If they were successful to the extend that we would lose all of the other organisations, that's 27 letters after your name that would simply disappear.

I'm a little confused. Is this letter a general press release ? or was it sent directly to Elton following yesterday's little contretente (spl?) Were it the latter, I do hope whoever was noting things down sees that Lee and I are properly recognised in the forthcoming Tory/CA cabinet.

[ 15. March 2005, 10:45 PM: Message edited by: argyll ]

Argyll
If your in the cabinet can I carry on being an "agent provocateur" and if so can I have a proper job description cos I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be doing
Regards
Dave

With care, argyll, with care.