Editing Hunting Act 2004 (section)

==Voting, conflict with the Lords and royal assent==
A bill identical to the one passed by the House of Commons in 2003 was reintroduced to the Commons on 9 September 2004.

On 15 September 2004, the day of the final vote ([[third reading]]) on the bill, two protesters staged the first invasion of the House of Commons chamber since [[Charles I of England|King Charles I]] in 1641. The protesters were quickly removed by Parliamentary officials, but the incident led to a review of parliamentary security, given that it was the second breach of the security of the chamber in four months ([[Fathers 4 Justice]] activists had thrown purple flour in the Commons four months earlier).  Simultaneously, a demonstration of between 8,000 and 10,000 people, including protesters from the [[Countryside Alliance]] filled Parliament Square outside.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3656524.stm|title=Pro-hunt protesters storm Commons|date=15 September 2004|access-date=22 January 2018|publisher=BBC News}}</ref> Later, John Holliday wrote for the ''Guardian'' an essay on his actions.<ref name=holliday>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/sep/28/houseofcommons.immigrationpolicy |newspaper=The Guardian |title=Pride not prejudice |first=John |last=Holliday |date=28 September 2004 |access-date=19 June 2015}}</ref>

On 17 November, on one of the days of the Parliamentary session, the Lords again insisted on its amendments to the main Bill. In the Commons, the Government's last-ditch attempt to compromise on a delay until 31 July 2007 won the support of only 46 MPs, although the delay until 2006 was inserted in the Bill. The Lords, who would have had to have accepted the Commons' other amendments (including the principle of a ban on hunting) and dues, rejected the proposal by 153 to 114.

With the Lords and Commons unable to come to agreement by the end of the Parliamentary year the [[Speaker of the House of Commons (United Kingdom)|Speaker of the House of Commons]], [[Michael Martin, Baron Martin of Springburn|Michael Martin]], invoked the [[Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949]], an infrequently used legislative device that allows the Commons to overrule the Lords where agreement can not be reached.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4015075.stm|publisher=BBC News|title=Fox hunting ban looks inevitable|date=17 November 2004|access-date=19 February 2008}}</ref> The Hunting Act was only the seventh statute since 1911 enacted using these provisions.<ref>{{cite hansard |date=8 April 2010 |house=House of Lords |speaker=Baroness Royall of Blaisdon |url=https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2010-04-08a.462.0 |title=Parliament Acts |column=462–463 }}</ref> The House of Lords was criticised for undemocratically blocking the legislation;<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article507683.ece|newspaper=The Times|title=High Court upholds Hunting ban |date=28 January 2005|access-date=17 November 2011|location=London|first1=Charles|last1=Bremner|first2=David|last2=Robertson}}{{dead link|date=September 2024|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref> however, other newspapers and broadcasters condemned [[Tony Blair]]'s Labour administration for giving in to what they perceived as the prejudicial views of anti-hunting Labour backbenchers.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4024503.stm|publisher=BBC|title=Hunters fall prey to Parliament |date=19 November 2004|access-date=19 February 2008}}</ref>

The act came into force on 18 February 2005, three calendar months after it received royal assent.<ref>The [[Interpretation Act 1978]], section 5 and Schedule 1</ref><ref>Hare v Gocher [1962] 2 QB 641, [1962] 2 All ER 673; Trow v Ind Coope (West Midlands) Ltd [1967] 2 QB 899 at 909, [1967] 2 All ER 900, [[Court of Appeal of England and Wales|CA]].</ref>