We don't have dancing bears now, do we? Of course not. If we did, the public would, rightly, feel nothing but disgust.

But hold on a minute. We still do have dancing bears. They're called dolphins these days, and people love to see them perform. And the creatures love it too. Sometimes they bare their teeth in a grin. How cute. Laughter and applause all round.

But hold on again. The dolphins aren't grinning. They're hungry. That's what an international convention on the welfare of captive dolphins has just learned. Attended in Mexico by 400 vets, marine biologists and dolphin trainers, the convention was told that the chlorine in dolphin tanks eliminates sources of vitamins. The undernourishment to which this contributes, is not made good by feeding the dolphins with dead fish - an "unnatural'' practice, as one speaker pointed out.

That's not all. To allow tourists to take snapshots, dolphins usually perform facing the sun. According to the main speaker, Dr Sam Ridgeway, head of the US Navy Marine Mammal Programme, which trains creatures to undertake perilous tasks like spotting and retrieving mines, this causes sunburn and cataracts. The "goofy'' sunglasses sometimes worn by dolphins as protection don't work.

Dr Ridgway didn't add that the sunglasses, like the tricks the dolphins are taught to perform, are an affront to the dolphins' dignity. It was William Blake (1757-1827) who wrote that "a robin redbreast in a cage puts all Heaven in a rage". That's equally true of an elephant, an orang utan, a penguin, or any other wild creature.

Among my hopes for the 21st Century is that it will bring the end for zoos. The only pleasure we should derive from wild animals is the pleasure of knowing they are out there doing their own thing in their natural settings. And if, as we are told, zoos are vital for the survival of species, this is the most compelling argument for getting our conservation act together to ensure that the survival of species no longer depends on the slender thread of captive creatures.

'Queen endorses new prayer book.'' That was the drift of most newspaper reports on the Queen's response to the Church of England's new prayer book, Common Worship. But did she really "endorse" it?

After expressing pleasure that the book also contains the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, she said: "Both the Prayer Book and modern services have a valued place in the Church of England today and are part of its future.'' That leaves her free to maintain her apparent preference for the Book of Common Prayer, which is used for most royal occasions.

On this I entirely agree with Her Majesty. Perhaps the most telling argument against "updated" forms of the prayer book is that this latest version comes only 20 years after the introduction of the Alternative Service Book - whose title alone makes the heart sink. Since work on the latest liturgy began seven years ago, the ASB was approaching its sell-by date only 13 years after coming into use. But the Book of Common Prayer has endured for well over three centuries.

Gerald Corbett leaves Railtrack with a £400,000 pay off. But, come on, we can do better than that. In July 1997, Archie Rose, a top man with the Burton group, left with a £600,000 pay-off. Becoming chief executive of Argos, he failed to save it from a hostile takeover by Great Universal Stores and left after three months with a pay-off of £540,000.

Appointed chief executive of Iceland last August, he made £2.2m when its takeover of the Booker cash and carry operation triggered share options and other perks. Just three months later, he has moved back to Burton, renamed Arcadia, picking up 6.5m share options, worth up to £14m.

Such obscene lavishing of wealth has prompted Nottingham MP, Alan Simpson, to propose a "super-rich" tax on individuals who earn more than £40,000 a week. Alas, the idea has no chance. Mr Simpson is Labour.