Skip to content or view screen version

Dr Death Toppled by the APP

Joe Hunters | 09.05.2010 13:49 | Animal Liberation | World

MP Evan Harris loses his seat after being a target of the APP campaign



Dr Evan Harris stood on the podium five years ago and romped home with a 7,683-seat majority. A safe seat for the Big Pharma front man and useful to them to help peddle their potions. These are all tested on animals, passed as ‘safe’ and often go on to do people harm or lead to more drugs which are tested on animals and so on. At around 4.00am yesterday morning following a number of tense recounts of the Oxford West votes, Evan Harris took the platform for the result along with Keith Mann but was rather less buoyant than previously. Let us not forget we don’t ask for votes for the Animal Protection Party instead we ask for voters to tick any box other than the target, for example Evan Harris. And they did, wiping out his majority!

Let us also remember that this defender of great evil has been prominent in inciting the savagery inflicted on our companions inside the windowless chambers of Oxford University. Remember Tipu Aziz brain damaging little Felix and the others for TV? Harris and Aziz marched with placards through the streets of Oxford alongside the vivisectors and assorted chums demanding more of this terrible, misguided exploitation of our fellow earthlings! How much of human society really wants more animals to be used in this way? We believe that most people have evolved beyond this and view children in a similar way to animals and as Evan Harris hasn’t we joined up some dots for his constituents and forged allies to achieve our stated aim.

Harris couldn’t hold back from moaning to the audience during his losers’ speech of the “dirty” nature of the Animal Protection Party campaign and told of his hopes that this approach wouldn’t become a regular feature of British politics. It only added insult to his injury when we reiterated that this is exactly what we intend to do!

“Science lost one of its strongest parliamentary supporters with the surprise defeat of Evan Harris, Professor David Nutt, who resigned as chairman of the Government's drugs advisory committee, said that it was a sad day for science and the Government." The Independent

To further strengthen this important step forward we have established connections with people who once might have had less respect for our kind of thinking than they now do. Many of who have expressed their admiration for our efforts, one Oxford candidate, a Green, was big enough to state that he believed that we had a greater case for standing than he did. And it’s perhaps worth noting that the personable Nicola Blackwood, the Conservative who has replaced Evan Harris, is against repealing the Hunting Act. Harris however voted very strongly against the ban. What a gem!

Vauxhall proved a difficult territory to infiltrate despite the inspired efforts of Jim and the team. Here we focused on Hoey’s ties to hunting and her constituency failings but other issues won the day there. We none the less positively communicated with a great deal of people.

In Hampshire we exposed the sickening brutality they call ‘essential medical research’ killing 70,000 animals a year in Wickham Laboratories to test Botox and Sarah Coats pulled 255 rural votes, beating the Independent candidate Graham Quar, Wickham Laboratories solicitor.

It’s another no-go area for the progressive campaigner but we went to Huntingdon, one of the Tory's safest seats. Jonathan Djanogly suffered a surprise 2,000 cut to his majority and Carrie Holliman was given 181 of the votes and a lot of support from people who were pleased that we directly challenged the Conservative on both HLS and his excessive expenses.

We have laid the foundations for the future. This was our first time out and no doubt mistakes were made. However, we will learn from them so that we can be even more effective in the future. There will always be those who will work obsessively to undermine initiative, but they are weak and are swimming against the tide. Everyone else can feel proud of what we have achieved here. We know we are.

Keith on Radio Oxford before the count:

 http://www.fromdusktildawn.org.uk/News/2010/april/keith_talks_to_oxford_radio.html

Oxford Mail after the count:

 http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/general_election_2010/oxwest/8152627.ELECTION__Conservative_topples_Lib_Dem_Harris/

The Times Online. A terrible night for Science:

 http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2010/05/election-2010-a-terrible-night-for-science.html

The Independent:

Science lost one of its strongest parliamentary supporters with the surprise defeat of Evan Harris, Professor David Nutt, who resigned as chairman of the Government's drugs advisory committee, said that it was a sad day for science and the Government

 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/time-for-a-rethink-for-science-lobby-1968210.html

Joe Hunters

Comments

Hide the following 20 comments

Victory?

09.05.2010 14:01

Is helping to get the Tories a seat could a victory?

anon


Vivisection has lost an important figure, well done!

09.05.2010 14:37

This is exciting news! Anything is possible!

Andrew


from The Times about Harris' defeat

09.05.2010 17:40

"The most damaging result came in Oxford West & Abingdon, where Evan Harris, the Liberal Democrat science spokesman, lost to the Tories by just 176 votes, after a recount. His departure will be keenly felt, for no MP has done more to speak up for science and to campaign for its interests over the past 13 years.

Evan Harris has been front and centre on almost any scientific issue you care to name. He played a pivotal role in ensuring that the recent Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act was amended so as not to constrain science or medicine. He has led the campaign for reform of the libel laws, in light of cases such as Simon Singh's. He speaks up for the researchers who conduct animal experiments, and was a brave defender of Oxford University's new animal research facility (which was in his constituency under old boundaries)."

 http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2010/05/election-2010-a-terrible-night-for-science.html

Andrew


Victory - NOT

09.05.2010 19:31

In all four seats you lost your deposits - in one case you polled 90 to the English democrats 230 - and Keith helped a Tory into Westminster. Could you have done worse?

The APP is an embarrassment!

@Vegan


APP not about getting votes

09.05.2010 20:46

You are not very good at reading the post before commenting are you? The tory is anti hunting whereas Evan Harris who APP got out wanted to overturn the ban. Also I think you will find that the APP don't care about their deposit since it wasn't about getting votes it was about getting people to vote for anyone but targets. Looks like someone is either illiterate, jealous or both

Andrew


Well done APP!

09.05.2010 22:00

I must admit I was sceptical about the APP at first, but the tactic is absolute genius! A prominent pro-viv MP was shoved out and a clear message sent that if you believe in animal abuse one day, you better be willing to stand up for it at election time too when the public make their choice.

Some added benefits are that an MP that was pro hunting act repeal was replace by one against repeal and that leaflets were distributed to so many homes at a very reasonable cost.

Ballot Box Terrorist


Why?

09.05.2010 23:10


Well congratulations to you and you single mindedness whilst giving us another Tory to fuck the working class in the arse. Go find your bollocks again and get back in the ALF. Take some direct action for what you believe in without making things even worse for other people.

Humans are animals too!

H


@ H

10.05.2010 00:24

I doubt the old guy was any better for people than the Tory. I say fuck with em' – good on the APP.

(A)


re: Is helping to get the Tories a seat could a victory?

10.05.2010 08:26

"Is helping to get the Tories a seat could a victory?"

You are very naive if you think Labour or the Lib Dems are any better than the Tories...

great result for the APP!

veg@n


Well Done APP

10.05.2010 12:45

Thinking outside the box to kick it from the inside. I like it!!!!

Nicey


Not clear that APP had any effect

11.05.2010 00:26

What proof is there that the APP influenced the Tories getting this seat? They may have taken it anyway as they did much better at this election than the last.

anon


re: Not clear that APP had any effect

11.05.2010 09:18

Not sure if you are just trolling, but Evan Harris himself claims in the Oxford Times that he lost the seat due to animal rights leaflets:

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/450931.html
 http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/8157195.Harris_blames_leaflet_smears/

so put that in yer pipe and smoke it!

veg@n


Harris himself says he lost due to APP 'dirty' campaign

11.05.2010 10:49

In Harris' losers speech at the count he states that he lost due to the personal attack of the APP and on BBC radio Harris highlights the significance of the APP campaign. He has moaned about the APP at every opportunity just drawing attention to the fact that it was due to them that he lost. Even the Conservatives told the APP that they were not expecting to win at all and that they credit their win to the APP. So now what is your next attack going to be? You must be running out of negative things to say now!!

Homeopath groups, chiropractors, anti-fluoride groups, the vaccine support groups, animal rights groups across the world and numerous others have all applauded the APP for what it has achieved here but one or two seem very jealous and don't want to give the animal rights movement a victory.

Evan Harris on radio the next day  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGcuQSF3AYE&feature=player_embedded

Stacey


Anyone? Bueller?

11.05.2010 12:23

Anyone know the difference between voting for someone who is physically responsible for the torture of animals and voting for someone who allows the physical torture of animals to continue?? APP sound a bit thick to be honest.

T


@T: who is Bueller?

12.05.2010 10:00

T: " Anyone know the difference between voting for someone who is physically responsible for the torture of animals and voting for someone who allows the physical torture of animals to continue?"

Can you explain what you mean here? Who is Bueller?

I don't think Evan Harris abused animals directly, he was just outspoken in favour of animal abuse.

It's irrelevant who replaces him, the political parties are pretty much identical, and the APP campaign is a purely negative one to lose outspoken supporters of animal abuse their seats. It's a fine example of how anarchist tactics can be used as part of the electoral process.

anon


Loss for abortion rights and common sense

13.05.2010 08:28

"Homeopath groups, chiropractors, anti-fluoride groups, the vaccine support groups ... have all applauded the APP"
That's quite a telling list of groups. All I can see in common is an anti-rational, anti-evidence stance that they use to make money by playing on peoples' fears.

"a fine example of how anarchist tactics can be used as part of the electoral process"
If you all are going full anti-rational, at least don't drag anarchism into it.

You might not like his opinions but at least Evan Harris knows what he talks about and was vital in defending last year's attempts to roll back abortion rights.

CH


harris abortion

13.05.2010 10:22

Harris didn't just back an abortion bill he wanted to extend the time limit and allow scans way after 24 weeks where people could look for abnormalities of their babies and then abort them. This is disgusting, we all know babies can survive after 24 weeks so an extension is well dodgy. So dodgy that even Harris realised this after the APP leaflets went out, what did he do? He deleted all the pages off his site! Not a man we can trust.

It is clear now that you talk in favour of Harris that you are on the wrong side, you are pro animal abuse. We all know you are freaking out because of the APP success, calm down and think your attacks through mate because at the moment you just seem to be in a panic and getting confused with what you are saying.

veg@n


Animal Taliban FTW.

14.05.2010 14:17

If you want to line up with religious fundamentalists against womens' reproductive rights, then you go right ahead.

I am scared of the APP, but not for the reasons you think I am.

CH


abortion

15.05.2010 19:51

it is not a question of being for abortion, i am fine with abortion, it is a womans right but extending the time limit is just sick. there comes a point where it is totally unacceptable. evan harris wanted to extend the time limit greatly and also allow scans where u can have 'designer babies'. it is not about aligning oneself with christians, just not wanting abortions to be carried out at 7 months - 7 and half months!!

veg@n


I'm pro-abortion but still support the APP's tactics

16.05.2010 10:09

I'm pro-abortion at any time, even just before birth, as the woman's right to control her own body. So I would go even further than Evan Harris did.

But I still support the APP's tactic of attacking Harris for supporting abortion, since a lot of his potential voters are anti-abortion.

If the APP stood against a hunter who was very anti-abortion, I would expect the APP to criticise them for their anti-abortion views as well.

Remember the APP has no policies other than ending animal abuse. Everything else is purely tactical. Political nihilism at its best!

anon