Page 1950 - Week 07 - Thursday, 20 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There is one more thing I would like to say. Until last week, with all my experience of life in general and my short experience in this place, I had not realised to the fullest extent how much support we receive, as members, from the Clerk and his entire staff. I, for one, wish to express my gratitude to him and, for that matter, to my own staff. We are all too readily inclined to criticise in this place. Perhaps we are a little slow or backward in saying thank you. Madam Speaker, I would like to say thank you to all those who support us. Furthermore, as a mere mortal, I would like to be reminded to do this now and again. Perhaps we could all remember to follow this approach from time to time, if we have not already done so.
Animal Welfare Legislation
MR LAMONT (5.11): I applaud and re-emphasise those sentiments expressed by Mr Westende. From time to time in the heat of debate fingers are pointed, desks are thumped and names are called. When a more rational approach is taken to an issue we find that those traits are lacking in all 17 members of this Assembly. That is no better displayed than in the work that has been recorded today of the committee system and the way in which that operates.
Unfortunately there are issues and maybe the Animal Welfare Bill was one that was made into an issue. I believe that it was made into an issue rather than of itself being an issue. A considerable number of hours of the time of this Assembly were given to the debate on the Animal Welfare Bill. In the spirit of cooperation that Mr Westende is talking about, I would have presumed that once it had become quite clear that a repetitious amendment would be defeated - I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe that 25 or 30 amendments were repetitions - it would not have been persisted with. I believe that that is something which we need to come to grips with. I do not say that that has not happened before in this Assembly. It certainly has not happened in the life of this Assembly, but I am aware that it did happen in the life of the last Assembly. It was one of those things that turned out to be extremely frustrating for everybody.
Madam Speaker, there is one other thing that I wish to do. A document tabled yesterday by Mr Westende, by leave, was, I believe, submitted by Mr Stevenson. He purported to phone one of the attaches in the Russian Embassy to ask a question about the times that the Moscow Circus had toured without animals. He indicated that the person from the Embassy allegedly had said that that had not happened. Madam Speaker, for the record, I quote from "Zoocheck Canada". It is a case where municipal by-laws prohibit the keeping of wild animals. At page 9 of that document there is a reference to alternatives to using wild animals in entertainment, the all human circus. It states: "The Moscow Circus already tours Britain without exotic animals". That is another area that we back up. I note that the annual reports of the UK Captive Animal Protection Society in the years 1985, 1986, 1988 and 1990 also indicate that the Moscow Circus has toured Great Britain without the use of animals. Madam Speaker, I rest my case. I thank the Assembly for its indulgence this afternoon in allowing me to correct the record.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Assembly adjourned at 5.14 pm until Tuesday, 8 September 1992, at 2.30 pm
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .