Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

This week’s Micah Challenge’s fourth annual Voices for Justice event has been under way in Parliament House and it is therefore very timely to have the opportunity to speak on the Asian Development Bank (Additional Subscription) Bill 2009, which gives the Treasurer authority for Australia to subscribe to additional shares in the capital stock of the Asian Development Bank, and for related purposes, including authority to issue promissory notes to the bank. As the detail of this bill has been well canvassed by the previous two speakers, I do not intend to revisit that.

On this year’s brochure, the Micah Challenge poses the question: what if you could change the world? It explains that the Micah Challenge is a global movement of Christians which aims to deepen engagement with the poor and to integrate social justice as an essential part of faith. Those involved in the Micah Challenge have been engaged in urging governments to fulfil their commitments to the millennium goals to halve poverty by 2015. The millennium goals targeted eight basic needs. They include: eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, achieving universal primary education; promoting gender equality and empowering women; reducing child mortality; improving maternal health; combating HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; ensuring environmental sustainability; and constructing a global partnership for development.

It is now late in 2009, which is the halfway mark and, since the world has made a commitment to the millennium goals, mortality rates for children under five have fallen, there has been progress in achieving the education goals, there has been progress on the goal to eradicate diseases such malaria, and according to the Asian Development Bank the absolute number of poor fell from 900 million in 1990 to about 600 million today. So there has been progress. But here we are, at the halfway mark of the timeframe to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, and we are still a long way from fully achieving those goals.

This is no time for complacency. According to the Asian Development Bank’s website, an estimated 1.7 billion people—more than half of developing Asia’s population—still live on less than $2 a day. The Asia and Pacific region is home to two-thirds of the world’s poor. Growth in the region has often been inequitable, threatening social harmony, and has put great pressure on the environment.

Over the years that I have been in this place, I have been privileged to travel to some of the developing countries in our region and have seen firsthand the work carried out through AusAID and non-government agencies as a result of Australia’s commitment to making poverty history.

The member for North Sydney spoke about some of the achievements of the Howard government, and I am pleased to say that there is a strong bipartisan approach to achieving the millennium goals. I think that everyone supports that objective. But during the time we were in government we were tested with the Asian financial crisis and also with the terrible tsunami which devastated many of our neighbouring countries in Asia. The government was very responsive and very generous with funding and assistance after both of those events which just added to the terrible poverty and suffering. So it should be that we offer that kind of aid to our near neighbours, because poverty is a terrible condition. It leaves men, women and children open to exploitation in the worst possible ways. It reduces lifespan as well as quality of life, and the abject suffering is heart-wrenching, to say the least.

My outlook on many things has dramatically changed since I came to this place and since I have had the opportunity to see firsthand some of the terrible conditions in which people live in our region. I suppose those changes were brought about after visiting children who were orphaned through HIV-AIDS in Africa—one of the continents on the Indian Ocean which is close to my home state of Western Australia. HIV-AIDS has produced 12 million orphan children. I have come face to face with victims of the child sex trade and have seen the devastating impact it has on young children, continuing through their adult years—if they manage to reach adult age. I have met children who go to school in two-hour shifts because there are neither teachers nor school buildings to allow students to have a full education. I have met children whose one meal a day was supplied through the World Food Program, funded by the Australian government. I have seen the squalid living conditions in the shantytowns of Africa and Asia, where human health was compromised because of a lack of sewerage, clean water and the sort of facilities that we take for granted. In the worst of these circumstances, health care is a hit-and-miss affair. In one instance, primary care was being delivered by student doctors who volunteered their weekends to deliver healthcare services. That was in one of the shantytowns that I visited.

On many occasions, I have marvelled at the quiet dignity of people living in such conditions and I have witnessed firsthand the triumph of the human spirit over adversity. The fact is, though, there can be no hope for peace or for the alleviation of poverty until we work together to eliminate the conditions that create poverty and ensure that all people have access to a decent standard of living. There are the obvious things that can be done, such as delivering food aid and establishing health programs to combat the spread of HIV-AIDS and other chronic diseases—and I might say that diabetes comes into that. I was pleased a couple of years ago when the UN made diabetes a priority, because it causes terrible devastation and just adds to the poverty. If you have one person who is suffering from the worst that that disease has to offer then another person has to stay home and care for them.

The Australian government has been engaged in facilitating better governance programs as well as delivering the aid programs. These programs are very important in those countries in our neighbourhood that have struggled to rebuild after devastating conflicts. This is fundamental to addressing poverty. The establishment of democratic forms of governance, including the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law, are basic building blocks that are pivotal to maximising the growth and development of a country and to achieving poverty reduction. Poor separation of powers and corruption robs a nation of its capacity to build and rebuild for the benefit of all, and abuse of power and corruption increase the risk of terrible things happening in those countries. We only have to look at countries like Darfur in our recent history to see the terrible problems that come through internal conflict and a lack of proper governance, separation of powers and application of the rule of law.

Also compromising the achievements of the millennium goals are the twin challenges of the recent global financial crisis and climate change. The global financial is the second such crisis we have seen, and this particular global financial crisis is perhaps going to have the biggest impact on developing countries. It hits them hard through reduced labour market opportunities and through government budget measures which, if the past is anything to go by, target social services, health and education for savings in difficult financial times. These cutbacks in essential services have always disproportionately impacted on women and children. The work of the Asian Development Bank, and Australia’s participation in particular, is critical, and it is pleasing that this bill has bipartisan support.

The Asian Development Bank was originally established in 1966 as an international development institution, and in 1999 the bank adopted poverty reduction as its overarching goal and announced its poverty reduction strategy. The strategy relies on three pillars. The first is pro-poor, sustainable economic growth, the second is inclusive social development and the third is good governance. These goals were reviewed in 2004 to take into account the Millennium Development Goals, and a broader, more comprehensive approach to poverty reduction was embraced. Partnerships and capacity building with an emphasis on managing for development results became key objectives.

Prior to the global financial collapse, many of the countries in our region were experiencing rapid growth, requiring the Asian Development Bank to rethink its strategic course, and this has resulted in a long-term strategy, called Strategy 2020, adopted in 2008, which will assist in delivering more innovative approaches to shaping the region’s future. It will always be necessary, though, to examine the operation of the Asian Development Bank, because events are moving very fast. It was pleasing to hear that the shadow Treasurer, the member for North Sydney, had attended one of the annual general meetings of the bank, because if we are to carry out our responsibilities here, we need to ensure that the commitment we have made to that bank is meaningful and that it is achieving what we all hope it will achieve.

There have been some criticisms of the operation of the bank. Oxfam expressed some concerns, saying in a general statement about development banks:

Operating at a global and international level, these banks have funded projects that have undermined people’s human rights and have had detrimental outcomes for poor and marginalised communities.

And, in a report released in 2008, Oxfam was critical of the operation of the Greater Mekong Subregion Program initiated by the Asian Development Bank. The report said, in part:

… there is significant evidence to indicate that for many who are the poorest in Mekong countries, life has actually become harder. In fact, one of the ADB’s own studies showed that in Laos, the level of poverty for these people had either stayed the same or become worse.

It went on to say:

While there is some debate about whether poverty is increasing or decreasing, there is no debate that rapid economic growth has led to greater inequality within all the Mekong countries. The gap between rich and poor has grown enormously. Perhaps most disturbingly, this gap has increasingly developed along ethnic lines—it is the region’s many ethnic minority groups who are being left behind at the bottom of the social ladder. This trend has serious implications for how society develops in Mekong countries.

The Asian Development Bank Institute did release a paper after that, entitled Transport infrastructure and trade facilitation in the Greater Mekong Subregion. I was pleased to see that they gave recognition to:

The gains from improvements in transport and trade facilitation—

being tempered by—

the potential negative impacts of improved transport networks in the region. These impacts include:

1. Increasing income disparities (international, regional, and ethnic)

2. A deterioration in regional economy in some areas and countries along the border

crossing routes

3. Spread of HIV and AIDS,15 avian flu, and other infectious diseases

4. Human and drug trafficking, a potential spread of terrorism

5. Deterioration of traffic safety.

I think the member for North Sydney mentioned some of these. So it is not all a rosy picture.

In 2007 there was a paper presented to the International Forum on inclusive growth and ‘poverty reduction in the New Asia and Pacific’ by Michael Walton of the Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, India and the Kennedy School of Government in Harvard University. He highlighted some of the challenges the Asian Development Bank faces in the next decade or so. I do not have time to go into that presentation in any detail, but I would commend it to anyone who is interested in the operation of the Asian Development Bank. In part, he said that:

• In poorer countries, this will often involve continued support to central governments in the provision of infrastructure and social services.

• However, in emerging market countries, this will increasingly involve a mix of financial and knowledge-related services that tackle the more complex challenges of inclusion of lagging regions or groups in both social and economic development, developing comprehensive mechanisms for managing security, financial inclusion, and the management of environmental concerns.

Growth and development does not always equate to poverty reduction—and I think this is the message that Michael Walton was trying to drive home—unless attention is paid to inclusive growth. He cautioned that there are:

… a whole series of complex challenges around inclusion that are both of great intrinsic importance for the well-being of relatively deprived groups in the region, and need to be tackled to assure the sustainability of long-term growth.

These are the challenges that I believe the Asian Development Bank is aware of.

This is a bill worthy of support as Australia can play an important part in providing both funding and expertise to aid the work of the bank. I know that constituents sometimes ask questions about taxpayer money being allocated for such purposes, and when they are having difficulty accessing services in their own communities I suppose we can all have some sympathy for their expressions of disquiet over aid programs. However, that is why we in this place have an obligation to explain why Australia’s involvement in assisting developing nations in our region is important and why we need to ensure that our investment in aid funding is properly acquitted and achieves the objective of alleviating poverty.

As I outlined earlier, seeing firsthand the work of Australians abroad and meeting some of those who are the beneficiaries of that work, I have no doubt about the important role we can play in ensuring that a reasonable contribution is made to alleviating poverty in developing countries within our region. Apart from a desire to redress the awful human suffering in some of these nations, there are practical reasons for aid. Such reasons include arresting the spread of infection and disease, eradicating trafficking in people and illicit drugs, and promoting peaceful coexistence with our neighbours. A wealthy country like Australia should be able to do better than make the international aid target of 0.7 per cent of gross national income only aspirational. We should make it a reality.

In conclusion, I applaud the work of those involved in the Micah Challenge and the Voices for Justice campaign conducted in Parliament House yesterday and today. In particular, I pay tribute to the people from Pearce who made the long journey to Canberra to speak out about the need to step up our campaign to end poverty. Mr Martin Bent, Ms Jackie Knight and Ms Rosanne Logie travelled from Perth to meet with me and others.

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context