Letter: Animal league's democracy endangered

Sir: Your article on the dispute within the League Against Cruel Sports ('Secret tapes fail anti-hunt group's bitter dispute', 10 May) is another vivid example of the internecine disputes that have afflicted the animal welfare movement over the past 25 years.

Philosophical differences over the status of animals and political navety lie at the heart the problem. Unfortunately, a number of people in the movement think that animals are more important than human beings, and some believe that politics has nothing to do with the elimination of cruelty. Sadly, many of the most influential individuals within the movement believe in these notions. Little wonder that progress has been so tortuous.

Until recently, the League Against Cruel Sports was one of the few animal welfare organisations successfully to eschew any form of sectarianism and whose perspicuous campaigns brought significant results. Sadly, those halcyon days appear to have temporarily evaporated.

Now the league's internal democracy is in danger, with an attempt by one of the factions to restructure the organisation which, if successful, will effectively prevent the membership from imposing policy decisions on the ruling executive committee. The league's close relationship with the Labour Party is likely to be another casualty if this proposal gets the go-ahead, even though the party has been officially opposed to bloodsports since 1978. Paralogism like this could leave the anti-bloodsports campaign in the wilderness for many years.

All is still not lost; the prize of a ban on bloodsports remains there for the taking - but in order to seize the prize the league must unite to turn public opinion into legislative action. If it does not, I fear it will become an irrelevance, incapable of achieving anything.

Yours sincerely,

CHRIS WILLIAMSON

Chair

League Against Cruel Sports

London, SE1

11 May