Animal Welfare Bill

I have a few amendments in this group. Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 would insert the word ““substantially”” after ““suffer””. My terriers would say that they suffer if I do not feed them on time or if I leave them at home when I go for a walk. We need some recognisable quantum of suffering in order to avoid the ordinary and minor mishaps that certainly affect any dog that is allowed to run loose in the countryside. A terrier running fast under barbed wire is likely to cut itself from time to time. It is what they do and I have no wish to keep my dogs on leads. We need to provide for a quantum of suffering. Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 have been tabled to look at the reasons given under subsection (3)(c). Nothing here would cover the tigers kept, say, at London Zoo. It is quite clear that they suffer. They live in extreme confinement for such animals and look as if they are having a pretty miserable time of it, but no purpose is explicitly provided in this clause to allow that suffering to be excused. I could cite other examples: why does one stock a river or rear pheasants? What benefit does that bring to offset the suffering? The argument there might be that the benefit goes to the environment. In these amendments, I am looking for specific exceptions or matters to be taken into account under subsection (3)(c) to cover particular circumstances where we ought to allow some offset against the cruelty that may be caused.