What Happened During the Westminster Debate on Driven Grouse Shooting?

Rob Beeson
Jun 30
3 min read

Updated: Jul 1

MPs gathered to debate the latest e-petition calling for a ban on driven grouse shooting on Monday 30th June 2025. The petition, supported by campaigners including Chris Packham and Wild Justice, claimed that grouse shooting is harmful to people, the environment and wildlife.

However, what followed was a robust defence of grouse shooting from MPs across the political spectrum, highlighting its economic, environmental and cultural importance to rural Britain.

A Strong Opening Defence

John Lamont MP (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) opened the debate. While acknowledging the petitioners' concerns, he firmly challenged their claims and defended the realities of grouse shooting as experienced by rural communities.

He explained that grouse shooting contributes £23 million annually to the Scottish economy and is part of a shooting sector worth £3.3 billion across the UK. Grouse moors support around 3,000 full-time jobs, particularly in remote areas. He questioned what would replace those jobs if a ban were introduced.

Lamont also highlighted the environmental benefits of managed moorland, pointing out that gamekeepers maintain 1.8 million hectares of uplands, restore peat, and protect biodiversity. Predator control, he said, benefits species such as curlew, lapwing and golden plover, which are more abundant on managed moors.

Backing from the former Prime Minister and Labour MPs

Former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak MP (Richmond and Northallerton) spoke passionately in support. He reminded colleagues that grouse shooting is more than sport - it's vital to the fabric of upland life.

Sunak rejected caricatures of the sector and focused on the working people it supports: gamekeepers, beaters, publicans and hoteliers. He said banning grouse shooting would be "urban Britain imposing its views on rural Britain" and would leave landscapes, wildlife and communities worse off.

Sunak stressed that the economic contribution stretches well beyond shooting days, into tourism, hospitality and manufacturing. He also pointed out that managed moors are vital for rare species, citing studies showing curlew, lapwing and merlin thrive where predator control is in place.

Sam Rushworth MP (Labour, Bishop Auckland) added a rare Labour voice of support. Representing England’s largest grouse moors, he said 500 local jobs depended on the activity. He spoke of attending a Let’s Learn Moor event, where children were taught about conservation and wildfire prevention by gamekeepers. He stressed the importance of managed landscapes for rural education, safety and biodiversity.

Wildfire Warnings and Criticism of Natural England

Kevin Hollinrake MP (Thirsk and Malton) highlighted the risk of unmanaged moorland becoming a wildfire hazard. He criticised Natural England's policies for increasing fire risk by limiting traditional vegetation control methods such as burning.

Hollinrake cited previous wildfires, including the Saddleworth Moor fire, as evidence that controlled burning prevents disaster. He also questioned changes to licensing and definitions that he argued were backdoor attempts to undermine the sector.

Voices from the Countryside

Several MPs described how grouse shooting supports rural jobs, communities, and traditions. Angus MacDonald MP (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire) offered a poetic defence of Highland life, warning against removing people from the land in the name of environmentalism. Jim Shannon MP (Strangford) reminded colleagues of the vital link between shooting and biodiversity, describing how predator control has helped curlew and lapwing thrive.

Greg Smith MP (Mid Buckinghamshire) and Robbie Moore MP (Keighley and Ilkley) also reinforced the economic and conservation case. They noted how moorland managed for grouse supports rare wildlife and acts as a carbon sink.

A Different View from Sheffield

Olivia Blake MP (Labour, Sheffield Hallam) was the only MP to speak in support of the petition. She argued that grouse shooting is rooted in privilege and exclusion, and contributes to climate change and biodiversity loss. She criticised burning practices and called for greater regulation, including a licensing system.

However, even among critical MPs, there was recognition that criminality should be tackled through enforcement, not blanket bans. Sarah Dyke MP (Lib Dem, Glastonbury and Somerton) acknowledged the role of well-managed shooting in conservation.

Takeaway for Moorland Communities

The message from Westminster was clear: driven grouse shooting remains a vital part of the rural economy, landscape and way of life. While campaigners seek to ban it, MPs from across the UK made the case that shooting supports biodiversity, reduces wildfire risks, and keeps rural communities alive.

For those who live and work on the moors, this debate underscored the need to defend traditional land management and challenge the growing urban disconnect from countryside realities.