Animal Welfare Bill

I support the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, and echo what the noble Lord, Lord Kirkhill, has just said. It is long past the time that we should think about getting rid of performing animals, especially in travelling circuses. As a young veterinarian many years ago, one of my jobs was to examine animals in a travelling circus. It was appalling to see the state that they were in. There was little that one could do to ensure that the welfare of the animals was improved, given that they were automatically licensed, because the circus was a source of revenue for the local authority. But we have moved on since then. The noble Baroness mentioned the five freedoms of such animals. With the exception of a few animals referred to in subsection (4) of the proposed new clause, there are no five freedoms. We know so little about the physiology and the sentience of the exotic species that often used to be seen—and still are—in some travelling circuses. We should admit that we are not in a position to confine them and allow them to travel in such circumstances. There is every opportunity for such animals to have inadequate exercise, inadequate care and inadequate healthcare. I notice that subsection (4) provides for the possible exemption of particular species. I suppose that horses and dogs may come into this category, as has been mentioned; we seem to know more about their physiology, their relationship to man and how to look after them than we do about any of the other species. Therefore, I am hopeful that the noble Baroness will stick to her guns. My comments are also applicable to Amendment No. 13, in the names of my noble friends Lady Byford and the Duke of Montrose.