The government has pledged to push through new anti-hunt legislation even if the House of Lords continues its opposition.

Making a statement to the Commons on Thursday afternoon, rural affairs minister Alun Michael said the government was seeking agreement on how to proceed, but emphasised that the views of MPs should prevail over those of peers.

He warned that the government was prepared to invoke the Parliament Act in order to bring legislation into law.

"In reaching my decision on how to proceed I have listened carefully to what has been said in the debates. The votes this week leave the two Houses diametrically opposed. Indeed I have rarely seen an issue where greater divisions exist," he told MPs.

The shape of the legislation is likely to centre around two principles; anti-cruelty and utility. The law will ban hunting that involves unnecessary cruelty but the utility clause will allow for culls or the extermination of vermin.

"We want to respect all views, but that has to start with respect for the strength with which the Commons made its views clear on Monday," said Michael.

"I promise to bring to the House of Commons a bill that will deal with this issue effective once and for all...and I earnestly hope that we can do so on the basis of as much common ground as possible."

Announcing a further six months of consultation, he promised that after that period the matter "will be resolved".

"Should there be no way through and should the new bill be frustrated in its passage rather than scrutinised and improved, the government could not properly stand in the way of the application of the Parliament Act, which again, of course, would be a matter for this House."

He said the government would prefer the bill to proceed "by debate and a search for common ground wherever possible, with conflict tempered by tolerance".

"If that process is frustrated we would reintroduce the bill as quickly as possible to this House, It will then be for this House and its procedures, and indeed for Mr Speaker, to determine whether the Parliament Act applies," he said.

Shadow rural affairs minister Ann Winterton claimed the minister's response shed very little light on how the government was intending to move forward. She said the "devil will as always be in the detail" and pledged to fight the government's bill.

"With whom will the minister consult and how will he reassure those in the countryside that he is not buying time?" she asked. "It is obvious to one and all in the House and elsewhere that this government is caught between a rock and a hard place of its own making."

"The issue is not about hunting - it never was - but about the settling of old scores," she said, adding her party would "fight for freedom and liberty".

Labour backbenchers warned the time for lengthy discussion was over and that they now wanted action.

Senior Labour MP Chris Mullin said: "I hope there won't be too much discussion and debate because we've had too much of that already."

He said that any legislation would have to be precise in order to avoid years of litigation and judges "driving a coach and horses" through the bill.

"We must bring this matter to an end. The will of parliament must prevail," he said.

Fellow Labour MP Tony Banks, who has been one of the leaders of the campaign to ban hunting, urged the minister to "let loose the dogs of war" and accused Michael of "chasing shadows".

"Where can the common ground come from? There is no common ground," Banks argued.

The legislation is expected to introduce tough new controls over fox hunting.

Whilst it may stop short of backing a total ban, the government is reported to be considering a bill containing measures much tougher than those proposed by the "middle way" group.

The new bill could outlaw stag hunting and restrict fox hunting to a very limited number of upland areas where other forms of pest control are not effective.

It will effectively end fox hunting in most parts of the UK before the next general election.

The Commons voted overwhelmingly on Monday night in favour of banning hunting but the Lords rejected this position and backed a system of licensing and regulation.

As a result the minister had been left with very few options. Labour backbenchers are calling for the issue to be finally closed with an outright ban.

Tony Blair voted for a ban on hunting but has said he hoped that a compromise deal can be reached. Downing Street had chosen to tread carefully ahead of the votes saying the government would "listen to the arguments" put forward.

Pro-hunt groups have warned they are likely to become more militant if the government goes against them and that they will take their fight to the European courts.

The Middle Way Group, which has lobbied for a compromise deal, claimed the two votes mean they had secured an overall majority in both chambers.

Liberal Democrat Lembit Opik, co-chairman of the group, said: "The middle way has secured support from 55 per cent of all those voting in parliament. This compares with only 47 per cent for a ban. Remember, the government asked for parliament's views on the issue. And the view is that regulation is the best way to achieve the animal welfare benefits and make sure hunting is conducted in a fair and responsible way."