Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm very pleased to open this debate on the general principles of the Wild Animals and Circuses (Wales) Bill.

I'm grateful to Mike Hedges, Llyr Huws Gruffydd, Mick Antoniw and their committees for their thorough and considered approach to Stage 1 scrutiny of this Bill. I would also like to acknowledge the important contribution of the individuals and organisations who informed the committees' scrutiny through both written and oral evidence. The strength of feeling on this emotive subject, from both sides of the debate, was obvious during the evidence sessions. The Welsh public and third sector organisations have overwhelmingly lobbied for a ban on wild animals in travelling circuses. Using wild animals in this way, purely for our entertainment, cannot be justified. It is outdated and unethical.

The Wild Animals and Circuses (Wales) Bill aims to address ethical concerns by banning the use of wild animals in travelling circuses. A ban in Wales would allow for a consistent approach across Great Britain. The Scottish Government banned it in 2018 and a ban in England comes into force later this month.

I will now address the recommendations made by the committees in their Stage 1 reports. The Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee recommends that the Assembly agrees the general principles of the Bill. I welcome this recommendation, but acknowledge that it was not a unanimous decision.

In their second recommendation, the committee seeks further explanation about the scope of the Bill, and specifically three issues. The first is why the ban does not extend to wild animals touring with travelling circuses. The objective of this Bill is to prevent the use of wild animals in travelling circuses on ethical grounds. Circus owners will still be able to keep their animals and to prevent them from doing so would go beyond this objective.

Secondly, the committee asked why the ethical argument for a ban on using wild animals in static circuses is weaker than for travelling circuses. Circuses by their nature travel. There are no static circuses in Wales and should an entity ever establish itself in Wales that could be considered a static circus it will either be caught by the provisions of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981 or the animal exhibits regulations. A local authority would determine the appropriate licence.

Thirdly, the committee asked why the ethical argument for a ban on using wild animals does not apply equally to domesticated animals. There are not the same fundamental ethical objections to the use of domestic animals in travelling circuses. There are many activities involving domesticated animals travelling to give performances that are considered perfectly acceptable by society. For example, if it's acceptable for horses to be used in showjumping, it would be difficult to argue that they should not perform a similar activity in a travelling circus. It is more appropriate to regulate the use of domesticated animals in travelling circuses rather than ban this activity. This will be achieved through the animal exhibits regulations that I plan to introduce later this year.

The committee recommends amending the Bill to include provision for Welsh Ministers to issue statutory guidance to support the implementation of a ban and for the guidance to include clarification on the meaning of 'wild animal', 'domesticated' and 'travelling circus', and also clarification of when the informal display of wild animals outside the main circus arena would constitute an offence. I've already committed to producing guidance and stakeholders will be consulted on its formulation. However, it's more appropriate for the guidance to be non-statutory as it will not set out additional requirements or obligations. Rather, it will provide clarity on how the Act will work in practice, and this is consistent with the approach taken in Scotland.

The environment committee's final recommendations concern the impact on the circuses and their animals. The two affected circuses are based in England. Any decision on the future of their wild animals is likely to have already been made, given the imminent ban in England. We cannot force the circuses to rehome or retire their animals. If they keep their animals, as they have indicated, they may retire them or choose to use them in a different way. That is their prerogative, provided they do so within the law.

The Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee made one recommendation. The committee asked for the clarification on the definitions of 'wild animal' and 'travelling circus', and an explanation of any differences from those used in the equivalent Scotland and England-only Acts.

The Bill defines a 'wild animal' as:

'an animal of a kind that is not commonly domesticated in the British Islands.'

Animals considered commonly domesticated in their country of origin but not of a kind commonly domesticated in the British islands would be 'wild animals' under the Bill. Our definition is similar to that of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981, and avoids the situation where the same species could be considered wild in a zoo but domesticated in a circus. The definition is similar to those in the Scotland and England Acts. There are some minor variations in the drafting, but I do not anticipate these resulting in a difference to the overall common effect.

A 'travelling circus' means:

'a circus which travels from one place to another for the purpose of providing entertainment'.

The definition recognises a circus is a travelling circus, despite there being periods when it doesn't travel. This is similar to the definition in the Scotland Act. The England Act does not provide a definition of travelling circus. Section 11 of the Bill provides regulation-making powers for Welsh Ministers to clarify these terms if there is any uncertainty in the future. The Scotland Act contains similar powers. The England Act does not. Why the UK Government decided to omit these is a matter for them.

I would also like to acknowledge the Finance Committee's consideration of the Bill. The committee recognises the financial implications are relatively small. There is a high degree of uncertainty concerning some of the impacts, because costs are unknown. Little additional information was forthcoming during the consultation exercise, but we believe any impact will be limited. Presiding Officer, I welcome this opportunity to debate the Bill and hear the views of Members.