Or, indeed, if the Prime Minister had given a stronger lead on the compromise that he claims to favour, rather than avoiding Parliament whenever the matter was being debated – his usual tactic until this week – then Lords and Commons may have reached a greater degree of co-operation on the issue.
However, given the implacable opposition of Labour's backbenchers to the very notion of fox-hunting, does anyone really believe that compromise was ever a possibility? To hunting's foes, the sport is anathema and while some no doubt genuinely believe it to be cruel, the overwhelming tenor of the objections has been an ugly class hatred, with several MPs openly expressing their zeal at getting one over on a perceived social élite.
Tony Blair must have been aware of the depths of this visceral loathing. Indeed, there would seem to be no reason for his insistence on re-introducing a hunting Bill other than a desire to placate his unruly backbenchers who are becoming a persistent thorn in his side on a range of other issues. The end result, however, he can surely never have envisaged. For a government to use the Parliament Act to force through a complete ban when the official position of the Prime Minister is opposed to such a ban, and in favour of a compromise, is unheard of.
That it has come to this may be indicative of Mr Blair's desperation to win friends in his own party. Yet the introduction of such bad and divisive law also calls into question his competence as a politician and leaves an indelible stain on his reputation.


Mean-minded MoD
Another Gulf War syndrome?
THE disdain shown by the Ministry of Defence towards the servicemen and women whom it dispatches to war zones around the world, to lend muscle to the Government's foreign policy, has been shamefully evident in its approach to Gulf War syndrome. The collapse in the health of many veterans of that conflict has been brushed away by the MoD as if it were none of its concern – well, now it is.
An independent inquiry, headed by Lord Lloyd of Berwick, has unequivocally stated that health problems suffered by an estimated 6,000 veterans were a direct result of their service in the 1991 conflict. Furthermore, by urging the MoD to establish a special fund to make one-off compensation payments to those affected, it has effectively challenged this arm of government to concede the point or contradict it.
Judging by its parsimonious record, that last is exactly what it will do, spending who knows how many thousands of pounds in attempting to persuade the courts to relieve it of this responsibility – and this despite the fact that its own studies have shown that veterans who had served in the Gulf were twice as likely to suffer from ill-health as those who had not.
To most minds, these findings require an explanation, but not to the MoD; they simply give it another chance to exhibit its well-honed skill at legalistic escapology and certainly – to its shame – it has done more than enough wriggling already. For instance, it prevented serving military personnel and officials from appearing before the inquiry, a devious manoeuvre justifiably attacked by Lord Lloyd for postponing any reconciliation between the Ministry and the ill veterans.
Reconciliation with these ill-used former employees, however, does not appear to be on the MoD's agenda, for the simple reason that it might result in pay-outs having to be made to them. The Government was ready, it seems, to ask them to make the supreme sacrifice for their country, but when all the evidence points to their having been made seriously ill as a result of this, it implies that they are nothing more than malingerers and dissemblers. Quite simply, this is insulting and wrong.

Exam fiasco
Ford had no choice but to go
THE stress of public examinations is shared by pupils and parents alike, with success and failure being the difference between elation and dismay, between rosy prospects and gloomy ones. It is therefore incumbent upon the examining authorities to be vigilant, conscientious and efficient, and it is right that, if they fall down in any of these areas, heads should roll.
Sympathy for Jonathan Ford, managing director of the National Assessment Agency (NAA), is not entirely warranted, therefore. He has resigned following the damning conclusions reached by an investigation into the chaos that engulfed this year's English tests for 14-year-olds, and he went because he had to.
The key-stage three tests were mired in errors and an inquiry was bound to follow. Having identified them, it left Dr Ford with one just course of action, and he at least has had the grace to follow it.