Animal Welfare Bill

moved Amendment No. 1: After Clause 8, insert the following new clause- ““CIRCUS ANIMALS (1) For the purposes of a circus, a person commits an offence if he uses or keeps an animal not of a kind designated under subsection (2). (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the Secretary of State may by regulations designate a kind of animal if he is satisfied, on the basis of scientific evidence, that the welfare needs of an animal of that kind are likely to be met if they are used or kept for the purposes of a circus. (3) A person does not commit an offence under subsection (1) until two years after the commencement of this section. (4) After the period specified in subsection (3), in the case of individual animals already working in a circus in contravention of subsection (1), no proceedings may be instituted before the end of a six month compliance period. (5) In this section- (a) ““circus”” means the keeping or introducing of animals wholly or mainly for the purpose of performing tricks or manoeuvres at more than one place during any period of one year, and (b) ““scientific evidence”” may include evidence of welfare during performance, training, travelling and any other circumstances pertaining to the circus.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I am sorry to bring this amendment back at Third Reading. I am aware of the new procedures and I wish that I did not have to bring it back. On Report, noble Lords expressed great concern about this issue. The use of animals in circuses is a matter about which people feel strongly. I withdrew the amendment then so that the Government could make clear their intentions on the circus working group’s remit, as it will decide how the matter is to be tackled. This is the last chance to raise this issue. I am afraid that, far from clarifying the issue, the Government have done the opposite. The remit of the circus working group was supposed to be based on a commitment that the Minister, Ben Bradshaw, made to investigate prohibiting the use of certain species in the circus. Since March, we have been told that the circus working group will work on banning some kinds of animals from working in circuses. Now, just as the Bill is completing its passage, all that changes. Last week the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, said that, "““we have given a commitment to ban the use of certain non-domesticated species in travelling circuses””.—[Official Report, 23/10/06; col. 1002.]" However, between Report and Third Reading, the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, wrote to Peers saying that, "““it is not correct to say that the remit of the group is to examine which species should be banned from performing””." Therefore, the Government’s intention with regard to the remit is no longer clear. Last week the Minister told us clearly in response to my Amendment No. 7 that it was not appropriate to make sweeping welfare generalisations on the basis of domestication. It seems inconsistent, then, arbitrarily to exclude domesticated circus animals from the consideration of the working group. The core of my amendment is still to place the burden of proof on those who would show that the welfare of different kinds of animals can be met in a circus environment. If the Government’s requirement for positive prohibition went ahead, the group might conclude that lions, tigers and pumas should be prohibited from use in a travelling circus. However, that would still allow circuses to use other species of the cat family, such as lynx, cheetahs and jaguars. The regulations would not work well, because each species would have to be banned each time, whereas my amendment proposes that species would be opted in as being suitable. Therefore, I am saying to the Government that it is better to presume against using any animals than to look at the species already in use to see whether welfare standards can be met. All sides of the House agreed on that point on Report, and I am grateful to noble Lords who expressed that view then and continued to express it to me before Third Reading today. In response to concerns expressed by the Bill team in discussions, I have added a time delay of two years to the amendment to allow the working group time to license the kinds of animals that can be kept and to give an extra six months’ grace to re-home animals that would be prohibited. My amendment also fills another lacuna, because it requires the circus working group to look at evidence of welfare in training, which the Government intend to leave to Performing Animals Welfare Standards International and to the industry to self-regulate. It would not be sensible for the circus working group to try to assess welfare in circuses without looking at training. I hope that the Minister will clarify the remit of the working group, given the variations in the Government’s stance to date. I hope that he will add training to the provision and that he will accept that a remit based on positive proof and licensing is the best way to proceed. I beg to move.