THE vast majority of people in the UK oppose the use of real bearskin fur on the Queen’s Guard’s caps, according to a new poll.
A survey from Peta and carried out by Populus – The Times’s official pollster – reveals that 75% of the UK considers the bearskin caps a “bad use of Government funds” and 73% would like to see the Prime Minister take action to replace the bearskin with faux fur.
The ceremonial caps cost £1710 each with more than £1 million of UK taxpayers’ money spent on the caps in the past seven years alone.
In a bid to stop using real bearskins, leading faux-fur producer ECOPEL has offered the Ministry of Defence (MoD) an unlimited amount of its fake bear fur free of charge until 2030.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson brags about bus passes in GMB grilling on cost-of-living crisis
PETA senior campaigns manager Kate Werner said: “As many Brits struggle to pay for essentials like gas and electricity, they’re rightly outraged at the thought of funding ornamental caps for which bears are killed,
“We remind the Government that switching to faux fur is a wildly popular move that would save money and bears’ lives.”
The caps have previously caused controversy, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his wife Carrie reportedly at odds on the issue.
In February, the Prime Minister was revealed in a leaked letter to support the use of the bearskin caps as faux fur replacements were found to be “unacceptable” by tests run by the MoD.
Johnson wrote: “Sadly, as man-made fur did not meet the standards required for a ceremonial cap which is worn throughout the year and in all weathers, the Ministry of Defence has no plans at present to take this man-made fabric forward.”
However, Carrie has in the past conversely described people who wear real fur as “sick” and that “fur belongs on animals only”.
Carrie has long been an advocate for animal rights and was described by Peta as a “fearless force for good when it comes to making the world a kinder place for animals” when she was awarded their UK Person of the Year award in 2020.
Peta has launched a government e-petition on the issue, which, if it reaches 100,000 signatures could trigger a parliamentary debate.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel