Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru | National Assembly for Wales

Y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, Amgylchedd a Materion Gwledig | Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee

Bil Anifeiliaid Gwyllt a Syrcasau (Cymru) | Wild Animals and Circuses (Wales) Bill

WA 27

Ymateb gan : Rachael Smith

Evidence from : Rachael Smith


I write in response to the wild animals in travelling circuses evidence sessions and to the petition calling for a ban on all animals in circus and travelling shows and the animal exhibits licencing as I believe many issues under the ban of wild animals in travelling circuses are relevant here.

Sentience must be applied at a biological level to be non discriminatory....difficulties acknowledged within....

Transportation is all legal and should not be up for discussion Welfare is exemplary within this individual business sector proven within law  science and application All these welfare issues claimed by animal rights representatives and petitioners to be false and their use found to promote the petitioners cause.I believe this makes the use of the original petition to be inadmissible evidence consequently invalidating the numbers representing the thoughts and feelings of the people of Wales and fact anywhere this so called evidence is signatures gained were gained by the use of false information and emotive language creating false allegations....inciting hatred amongst the susceptible ...I believe this is a 'manipulation of A to B to gain what A wants'.the proposed ban in itself an act of abuse. The same laws covering domestic abuse within existing framework...

I believe Lesley Griffiths AM to be a major contributing factor pawn in this pursuit.she posts on her own Facebook her support to the 'underdog' of society her actions of discrimination here prove otherwise and I believe this to prove the need for her dismissal.I believe from her own media she is against the causes of mental health issues. Discrimination and abusing a system 'allow A to gain power over B'is a major cause of mental health issues.

Lesley Griffiths AM on 1st October 2019 supported a national framework to help remove barriers disabled people experience in everyday life.The animal circus and animal industry to me as a disabled person,in the way I use contact with animals is a physical and mental therapy,and one that mentally and physically stimulated my mind and body.I wish to freely continue to use my self supported therapy without restrictions imposed by her Lesleys proposal.

I believe the actions of the petitioners and animal rights industry against circus,decades worth,are an illegal act of abuse,manipulation of conscious thought(sentience),manipulation of finance for personal gain and a perfect example of 'why we love to hate'...crowd following mentality e.g use of emotive false information to increase hatred to gain a following to manipulate for A to gain power over B.

Why does B have to keep proving to A by evidence and licensing that B is correct when A is the accuser? why does B have to keep paying to prove their innocence when already proven by licensing and regulations already imposed by A's claims originally to prove B correct?

Is this not abuse and non deployment of laws regarding protection of peaceable living,protection of B against harm from A and separation of a person's within a society? Where does innocent until proven guilty apply here? Here the circus are innocent and the petitioners and supporting industry are guilty...requiring action through criminal law.

I believe the licensing application will action the same ways of discrimination...example :why will A have to have a license and B not?again an act of the innocent having to prove themselves to others that are imposing the believe that animal owners do not respect sentience and ignore the animals welfare requirements broad spectrum ownership....and implying a falsely advertised belief.

In answer to why so few supporters of circus with animals have responded,I believe the majority of the population,especially those responsible for animals have zero faith in animal rights industry especially the RSPCA ,and due to this take zero interest in what they say,or the falsified promotion of these industries,as practical evidence and personal experiences have proven their inclusion in practice to be detrimental to animal welfare as an integral part of their actions.

The bubble we live unis a bubble created by blind faith that our governing bodies will act within the law for us,and do the unbiased jobs the governing bodies are believed to carry out .....severe lack of knowledge within general public needs addressing between what's happening in assembly and the direct contact with the general populance.

I am disgusted that Welsh government have to time restrict this particular case due to sunset clauses imposed by previous government no longer dealing with this contentious creates an unjust situation for concerns if your report does not support the laws of discrimination,rights of persons and trade by january,the legitimate standing of licenses goodwill run out ..licenses need to be unnecessary by law of the Animal welfare act 2006 coverage or need extending again as they are viable effective concern that if we do not address this it will lessons proof the circus had to ensure its protection against abuse and allegations made by other parties as it is the only form of protection in action.

Self regulation of the Animal welfare act 2006 is evident and sufficient for all other industries within society.I also believe Joyce Watson to be a biased member of committee due to her personal attack using words including 'selectiveness towards Thomas Chipperfield ...I found it very derogatory and an insult to him.

I call for the prosecution of these acts of discrimination and abuse,and to compensate the victims with consideration to the historical and present harassment of these people ,as within any other sector of society.


I would like to add my concerns about offenses and persons responsible.....if we continue with the suggested proposal we need to look at criminality when owner has placed an animal on loan to another etc  it is not precise enough to cover the differences of responsibility


I would like to address the problem of failure of habitualisation  for the animals ..for example if they are removed from their home environment the travelling circus...what happens if they do not adjust and need to go back to that environment for their welfare?



Please apart from colour define the difference of a circus marque to any other marque used to ensure welfare during the performance and exhibit of animals against inclement weather...most county shows do not provide this protection on site and is a valuable asset used to ensure all welfare is maintained at all is a shelter and permanent home structure that is transportable that is entirely familiar to the animals


I believe animal rights to be acting in a superior manner to others using their considerably larger financial standing gained immorally to target a small industry to gain a political footing .I believe this point of question needs raising due to the incredible amount of money donated to politics using falsified information and agenda to gain that money in origin..making politics a paid pawn.

I am already at a no confidence conclusion in my own view of governing bodies ...this proposed act is emphasising this to me ..I have deep concerns of the future of Welsh politics and the people it is representing.