Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 7 Hansard (20 June) . . Page.. 2277..
MR QUINLAN (continuing):
of activity. It is surprising just how many people are involved in trotting around a ring with a dog. Then there are the Gun Dog Association, the Kennel Association and the district clubs. So, quite a number of people are affected. A number of people spend quite a deal of their free time associated with this pastime and are active in this pastime, and this is an imposition on them. It is not only an imposition on them; it also is likely to have a negative effect on the process and the structure of clubs and the shows that occur in the ACT.
If the minister is conducting a review it might not be a bad idea if we brought a little rundown of the format of that review back to the Assembly next time and if it is possible suspend these fees until the review is complete. That would be a gesture of goodwill towards these people and let them know that the review is a genuine review.
MS TUCKER (11.46): The Greens will also be supporting this motion. It seems quite reasonable.
MR CORBELL (11.47), in reply: Mr Speaker, I thank members for their support this evening. I am pleased to hear of the government's intention to conduct such a review. The minister say it is already ongoing. Well, as Mr Hargreaves said, that is not what we were told on Monday, so obviously something happened between Monday and today. Nevertheless, we welcome it, and we encourage the government in the interim to not proceed with this fee structure until that review has been completed.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Motion (by Mr Smyth ) proposed:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
World trade and globalisation
MS TUCKER (11.48): I want to use the adjournment debate as an opportunity to give the Assembly a few more statistics regarding poverty in the world and globalisation. I am not going to quote a journalist in the Canberra Times. I will first of all quote UNEP's executive director, Klaus Toepfer, who said that over the last 50 years there has been a rapid expansion of world trade, with the total value of global exports growing from $US350 billion in 1950 to almost $US5.5 trillion in 1999. Trade liberalisation contributes to economic growth, yet the benefits have not been fairly shared between countries and in some cases have led to greater environmental degradation and increased poverty. One part of the solution is for trade and environment policy-makers to work together to develop mutually supportive trade and environment policies, which was the point of my motion.
Another point that was made was that most developing countries are opposed to the new trade round. They have not yet absorbed the demands on them made at the Uruguay Round. The United Nations development program estimates that under the WTO regime in the period 1995 to 2004 the 48 least developed countries-these are the poor people that Mr Humphries, Mrs Burke and others were saying were so well off-will be worse