House debates
Monday, 24 February 2020
Bills
Official Development Assistance Multilateral Replenishment Obligations (Special Appropriation) Bill 2019; Second Reading
5:15 pm
Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source
Once again, I note that, with respect to the Official Development Assistance Multilateral Replenishment Obligations (Special Appropriation) Bill 2019, like so many others, no government members are speaking. Perhaps it comes as no surprise given what speakers on this side have said with respect to the government's commitment to overseas aid. Most Australians have a good understanding of the contrasts of the living standards of Australians when compared with that of people living in so many developing countries. People have sometimes had the opportunity to travel overseas and see for themselves. Others have seen footage from news services, films or documentaries, and some people have actually come from those developing countries. They understand just how fortunate we are to live in Australia. They know how much more difficult life would be in many of these developing countries, even if their own life in Australia is filled with struggles.
In today's world where there is so much affluence, there are still so many people in parts of the world who, through no fault of their own, live in extreme poverty, in conditions that no Australian would ever want to live in. These are often women and children who not only live in poverty but are exploited, enslaved, abused, assaulted and disempowered. We live in a world community. People in developing countries who live in misery are fellow humans who need our help. I acknowledge that there is widespread need, even in our own so-called 'lucky country', and that so many Australian families are also struggling through life. I heard the other day that 3.2 million Australians live below the poverty line. The recent fires, floods and storms have devastated so many of our own communities, yet I believe that we have the capacity to assist Australians in need while simultaneously lending a hand to people suffering overseas.
Over the past months, I've met with several people who are involved in global aid programs or campaigning for Australia to lift its aid commitment. Most of these people represented Christian faith organisations. They all had the same message: Australia could and should do more to reduce global poverty, with a particular emphasis on poverty throughout our Pacific neighbours. Yet Australian aid is declining. Since 2013, $11.8 billion has been cut. For the 2018-19 year, Australian aid spending was just $4.16 billion, or just 0.22 per cent of gross national income. It is projected to fall to just 0.19 per cent. This ranks Australia as 19th of the 29 nations that give aid and it will be the lowest level of aid as a share of GNI since data was first published in 1961 for Australia.
Fighting global poverty is not only the right thing to do but is in the national interest, as so many people have pointed out. I heard the remarks of the member for Macnamara with respect to the fact that, if we don't provide aid, then quite often other countries will, and that will in turn cause further problems for us in years to come. Providing aid not only creates stability in those countries but opens up trade opportunities, creates goodwill between us and improves our own national security—again, a point that has been stressed time and again by speakers on this side of the House.
Over the years, international aid has improved the lives of millions of people, and again that is acknowledged. However, there is still a huge need out there. Millions still suffer, often entrapped in slavery or burdened by disability in places with no social support and extreme poverty. Some 68.5 million people have now been displaced from their homelands and, of those, 85 per cent are living in developing countries where the host nation itself needs help. And yet, for all that, those host nations are in turn helping others who are in perhaps greater need than themselves.
In my meeting with two separate Micah delegations last year, I was presented with five objectives that Australia should pursue in helping our Pacific neighbours. Those five objectives are:
1. Ensure the new aid policy empowers local communities in the Pacific to lead their own inclusive and sustainable development.
2. Ensure the new aid policy recognises the needs of the most vulnerable members of our Pacific family, particularly women and children.
3. Work with the Australian Church and Christian development agencies to leverage and amplify the strength of the Pacific Church as a key partner for human development.
4. Recognise the impact of climate change in the Pacific including the increasing risk and impact of natural disasters.
5. Ensure the Pacific Step Up is not at the cost of 'stepping down' elsewhere in the world.
I believe that those five objectives are all quite reasonable and are things that this country could commit to. I am also concerned that part of the aid that is now being directed to the Pacific comes at the expense of other nations that in past years have been assisted by this country. So we might be stepping up our aid in the Pacific area but we're doing that at the expense of other vulnerable nations. This legislation makes a special appropriation by Australia to six multilateral development funds which are directly associated with global aid initiatives. Australia's annual payments to the six funds average around $350 million.
I raise a matter associated with this legislation. Right now some developing countries, including Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, all of whom may be funding recipients under this legislation, continue to use chrysotile—otherwise known as white asbestos—in construction projects. Chrysotile is a dangerous asbestos product that will cause long-term health harm to people already struggling. It has been banned in most developed countries, yet the exporters of chrysotile are running a dishonest campaign claiming chrysotile is safe and, in turn, they are blocking global efforts to have it banned. Australia should make it a condition of funding under this legislation that chrysotile will not be used in any construction project.
In November the Australian Senate voted unanimously to call on the government to lobby for a change in policy to end the use of asbestos in Asian Development Bank financed projects. I note that the Asian Development Bank itself recently made a statement that it would stop allowing asbestos products to be used in their projects from 2020. It is important that chrysotile is included in the definition of asbestos products. I urge the Treasurer to raise this issue at the Asia Development Bank annual general meeting in South Korea in May this year.
The continued use of this product is simply adding to the woes of people in developing countries and will continue to do so for decades to come if it is allowed to continue. This is one mechanism we have, as a nation, to try and help those people by ensuring that the funds that we assist them with are only used in projects where this product is not being used, and it will in turn help stop those countries who are profiteering from the use of this product and selling it to the needy developing countries of the world.
Most of the other matters that I would have otherwise touched on have been touched on by other speakers on this side of the House, and I concur with what has been said. As others have quite rightly emphasised: this is in Australia's national interest and I, like so many others, quite often out in the community hear concerns about the level of aid that we make. The level of aid pales into insignificance compared to what other countries are doing—and to what we should be doing, given that it is not only in our long-term interests but also, as I said at the outset, the right thing to do.
I note that, regardless of government, as I get around my community, there are church groups, service clubs, schools, businesses and individuals who are taking on board responsibility for overseas aid programs they, individually or collectively, donate towards. This must amount to millions and millions of dollars each year that this country sends overseas because of the goodwill of the people of this country. I applaud and thank all of those people for doing that. But they are setting an example that, quite frankly, this government would do better to follow, because the efforts of this government simply don't match the goodwill of the Australian people.
No comments