WHILE holding no brief for people who wish to hunt, I am quite resolute that any attempt to mislead the public as to why the Labour Government has not fulfilled an election pledge to ban hunting should be challenged and quite rightly be laid at the door of those responsible.

Your correspondent Andrew Day (EA, April 27) states quite unequivocally that the reason is that the unelected House of Lords has overturned the democratic vote of the House of Commons.

I do not propose to debate the essence of democracy in the lower house other than to say the free vote of an MP often has little in common with the wishes of the majority of the populace.

However, I would like to clarify the point regarding the role of the upper house in the fox hunting debate.

The House of Lords received a Bill from the Commons and was unable to complete a proper and detailed scrutiny of it in the time allowed by Government.

As such the Bill failed to complete its passage through both Houses of Parliament.

At no stage has the Hunting with Hounds Bill been voted on in the House of Lords as Tony Blair once claimed and as such it cannot be said the MPs' wishes have been overturned.

What Mr Day fails to state is that Mr Blair has a significant majority in the Commons and could, if he so desired, force any legislation through the Commons using the Parliament Act.

That he has not done so suggests he is a man for all seasons and for whom principle is a currency with which he seeks to buy the popular vote.

After all, in two election manifestos he has promised a Bill to ban hunting but having "pulled the rug" from under Mike Foster's Private Members' Bill in 1997 he has then failed to ensure a Bill passed through Parliament in the last six years.

I suggest we may see legislation to ban hunting in place by early 2005 but wouldn't hold my breath after all Mr Blair may well have an election on his hands.

If blame is to be attributed at least let's ensure it's attributed correctly.

DES MORGAN

Caraway Drive