THE Tories vowed to repeal the hunting ban as they supported “with a heavy heart” a doomed attempt to preserve the practice under a strict licensing system in the Commons last night.

With cries of “Tally ho!” MPs voted by 321 to 204, a majority of 117, against the last-ditch amendment supported by Tony Blair to allow some foxhunting to continue in England and Wales for pest control purposes. They threw out changes from the House of Lords designed to save some registered fox and stag hunting and hare-coursing by 343 votes to 175, a majority of 168.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Lab, Ogmore), who proposed the amendment to revive hunting under licence, signalled the hopelessness of his cause when he likened it to the charge of the Light Brigade.

But he seemed even to be abandoned by Alun Michael, the Rural Affairs Minister and sponsor of the Government’s original Hunting Bill which proposed a registration scheme in 2002, when Mr Michael told the Commons that a total ban was “workable”.

The votes of Mr Blair and several other Cabinet members were not enough to prevent a crushing majority for an outright ban.

Sir Gerald Kaufman (Lab, Manchester Gorton), a veteran anti-hunting campaigner, said that the issue was the “ethos of hunting — the cruelty of tearing wild creatures to pieces for pleasure”. He accused hunt followers of behaving like “louts and hooligans” and said that the “will of the House must prevail” over the unelected House of Lords.

Sir Gerald queried the Prime Minister’s support for a compromise. “It is difficult to understand what compromise he is actually supporting because this Bill, if amended in the way suggested by Mr IrrancaDavies, is far from a compromise.”

Tony Banks (Lab, West Ham), another veteran campaigner, said that killing animals for pleasure was “wrong, immoral and has to be stopped”. Mr Irranca-Davies told MPs: “I do not hunt but I recognise that others do and these people are not demons or monsters. But they have been made demons and monsters as we have sought to simplify the terms of this debate.” A total ban would criminalise people who “teach our children and police our streets”, he said.

His amendment would ensure fox and deer hunting was banned unless exempted under the Bill or registered for pest control purposes. This was “a highly workable compromise that reflects the political reality of this precise moment”.

Mr Michael said that he would vote for the amendment as it reflected his own desire to find a way through the “sharp and destructive” divisions of opinion on the subject.

But he also said that the “Bill as amended by Tony Banks (for an outright ban) is still a workable piece of legislation”.

Attacking the way peers had dealt with the Bill, he said that should the Parliament Act be invoked to force through the Hunting Bill, it would be the upper chamber which had “provoked” it, not MPs who chose it.

He said: “They voted down the middle way option when it was before us; they sent nothing back to us last year although they had plenty of time to consider the Bill fully and send it back . . . (and) they rejected the possibility of compromise last week.

James Gray (C, North Wiltshire) said his party would, “with a heavy heart and through gritted teeth”, support Mr Irranca-Davies’s amendment. He defended hunting as “the most humane and selective way of culling foxes, deer, hare and mink”.

He pledged: “If the Bill is passed using the Parliament Act then an incoming Conservative government will bring in a government Bill in government time to repeal it.”

Mr Gray added: “Never in the field of legislation has so much time been spent by so many on a matter of importance to so few.”

Kate Hoey (Lab, Vauxhall), a hunt supporter, said that a ban had been rejected by a majority of Labour peers. But Mr Michael told her: “The decisions of Parliament are not taken by a sort of opinion poll where you average out the votes on either side in either the Lords or this place. It is time to fulfil what is a manifesto commitment to enable Parliament to reach a conclusion on this issue.”

Andrew George (Lib Dem, St Ives) urged ministers to consider giving compensation for those likely to suffer “catastrophic” effects on their livelihoods from a ban, adding: “This is not an act of God, but an Act of Parliament.”

Edward Garnier (C, Harborough) said the debate was about the “exercise of naked political power” and a dispute about how that power should be exercised. “It is regrettable that we are left in this rather dirty, filthy little arrangement that has been sorted out within the Labour Party.”

HOW CABINET VOTED ON COMPROMISE

For: Tony Blair (Prime Minister), David Blunkett (Home Secretary), Jack Straw (Foreign Secretary), Margaret Beckett (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary), John Reid (Health), Hilary Armstrong (Chief Whip).

Against: John Prescott (Deputy Prime Minister), Peter Hain (Leader of the Commons), Alan Johnson (Work and Pensions), Paul Murphy (Northern Ireland), Charles Clarke (Education and Skills), Ian McCartney (Labour Party Chairman), Paul Boateng (Chief Secretary to the Treasury).

Did not vote: Gordon Brown (Chancellor), Hilary Benn (International Development), Alistair Darling (Transport), Geoff Hoon (Defence), Patricia Hewitt (Trade and Industry), Tessa Jowell (Culture, Media and Sport), Alan Milburn (Chancellor of Duchy of Lancaster).

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Everyone will get vaccine against swine flu
• Artificial sperm and the race to build a baby
• BBC jets out stars to tout for prizes