No. I will finish with the legal matters before giving way again.
Obviously I cannot tell the House that there would be a challenge, or what the result would be, but we do have to note the advice. The Radford review concluded in 2007 that no scientific evidence existed to show that circuses by their nature compromised the welfare of wild animals. It was on that basis that it concluded that a ban on the grounds of welfare would be disproportionate in the absence of evidence that welfare was compromised.
There are two further risks from that action: the cost to the taxpayer and the risk that a court might agree to suspend the ban until legal proceedings had concluded. In other words, although the law itself might have been passed, nothing would have changed for the animals themselves.
Wild Animals (Circuses)
Proceeding contribution from
James Paice
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 23 June 2011.
It occurred during Backbench debate on Wild Animals (Circuses).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
530 c583 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:13:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_752842
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_752842
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_752842