Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's a pleasure to follow the member for Fenner in this debate and to make a contribution towards this proposal on the table around the Official Development Assistance Multilateral Replenishment Obligations (Special Appropriation) Bill 2019. I should say at the outset that Labor supports this bill because it's providing appropriation funds to support Australia's commitments to replenish a range of important multilateral development funds. And before I go to the heart of speaking to any of the detail of this bill, I would like to refer to the second reading amendment, which was moved by my Labor colleague the member for Maribyrnong. Quite rightly, it notes not just the importance of Australia's official development assistance, but also the grave concerns that we on this side of the House have with regard to the government's cuts of $11.8 billion out of the foreign aid budget. This places Australia's commitment to overseas development assistance as a share of our gross national income at a record low.

I think this House—let's hope most, if not all of us in this House—would agree that Australian aid saves lives. It's combatting poverty across the region. Importantly, it's helping to redress some very gross inequities between men and women that exist in many of these nations. And it's addressing real hunger as well as issues of gross food insecurity that exist across the globe. It's helping countries build the foundations that they need to grow sustainably. And it's building better infrastructure, health and education systems that help people lead happier, healthier and more productive lives in their communities.

Australian aid is also there to help tackle the root cause of instability, and that is economic disadvantage. Clearly aid investment is the right thing to do. It's the ethical thing to do. It's a commitment that this parliament has made over many, many decades now. And we know it's also the smart thing to do, because aid helps build our relationships with other countries; it increases our opportunities to build new trading partnerships and, indeed, strengthen old ones; it bolsters our international influence; and it improves our own security by addressing the insecurities and instability that is felt in other nations.

Under Labor, international development grew to its highest—that is, 0.34 per cent of gross national income—in 2012-13. Regretfully, the Liberals have worked hard at reversing this very proud achievement. Year on year we've seen cut upon cut. From budget to budget we have watched in horror as Australia's aid contribution has continued its downward slide. Under Labor, overseas development aid hit a high-water mark of 0.34 per cent of gross national income, as I said. But it's now on track to be just 0.19 per cent. This is the lowest level of Australian aid since the Commonwealth started publishing data back in 1961. The Liberals have set our country back—and, indeed, our planet. Their abject neglect of overseas assistance has damaged our relationships in the region, it has sullied our international reputation, and it has diluted our influence and opened up a space for damaging new alliances to form.

And now the government are refusing to lift a finger to address climate change, the very thing that we know will drive many poorer countries deeper into poverty and despair. This is a small-minded, ill-educated, petty approach that will be to the detriment of our country and the world. It's time for the Morrison government to grow up and start acting like responsible adults.

There may be some people who think it's an overreach to talk about just how serious climate change is for our region—an issue that this government chooses to ignore. The government can't cope with the debate domestically and it sure as hell can't cope with one at an international level. We saw some very unedifying debate here in this chamber earlier today on the issue. However, I was very privileged to be in this House in mid-January when the Australian parliament hosted the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum. A number of our parliamentary colleagues were present, and I had the honour of chairing the debate on climate change in the forum.

You might recall, Deputy Speaker McVeigh, that people arrived here in mid-January, at the height of the bushfires, the 'summer of dread'. There was toxic smoke all across the nation's capital. We were, indeed, issuing delegates with very-fine-particle face masks to wear whilst here in Canberra. In the debate on climate change that I chaired, every single nation—there were about 40-odd nations at the table—began their speeches with condolences to Australia for the pain that our country and our people were going through in that 'summer of dread', for those catastrophic bushfires that had taken place. And the next questions were: How can we help Australia to tackle this serious problem of climate change here? How do we get some cooperation amongst the Asia-Pacific nations? I can see the minister here in the chamber, and he addressed that forum. There were many Pacific nation members there, all of whom asked me: what will Australia be doing? Having seen the catastrophic fire season unfold in Australia, what would be this government's response to the long-term issues?

I was delighted to enable each of those Pacific island nations to participate in that debate, because many of them did not have full membership status at that forum; many were there as observers. And I do acknowledge the assistance of the Australian government in ensuring that many of our Pacific neighbours were able to attend that forum. But, make no mistake, climate change is front and centre of mind for the people in our nearest neighbourhood—what the impact on their nations will be and what Australia's role is going to be in the Asia-Pacific region in terms of a considered response to those issues of climate change.

I would like to go to the second issue that the member for Shortland has raised in his second reading amendment—that is, our grave concerns about the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison coalition government's cuts to the foreign aid budget. As I said, we know the cuts are now at 11.8 per cent. Despite a lot of rhetoric that we are now hearing from government with regard to the significance of the Pacific and the so-called Pacific step-up, which I will come to in a little while, it is very clear now, through the efforts of my Labor colleagues and Senate estimates processes, just where those cuts have been borne in our foreign aid budget. Cuts to Australian assistance in areas like health, in particular, are impacting on our Pacific neighbours in a particularly hard manner, despite the government's so-called rhetoric around the Pacific step-up. I would note that cutting health assistance to Samoa by 36 per cent in the aftermath of its tragic measles epidemic raises very serious questions about whether the Morrison government is genuinely responding to the needs of our Pacific friends.

The budget has seen big, savage cuts over consecutive years. The cuts in aid to Africa are so savage that aid is near non-existent. There is very little support going into that nation. There are massive cuts in aid to South-East Asian nations. It is unfathomable, given the government's big push for the Pacific step-up, that a lot of Pacific nations are now wearing the brunt of these cuts.

We have alarming figures that show that Australia's annual overseas development assistance spend on education to all developing nations has been slashed by $430 million, or 41 per cent. I already indicated the dire situation for Samoa in relation to health. Overall spending on health has gone down by $260.8 million, or 32.3 per cent, since 2014-15, when the coalition first came into power. We know that supporting education is vital to achieving gender equality in these nations, to preventing violent extremism in our region and to ensuring that people are as best placed as they possibly can be to secure an independent economic future.

The recent outbreak of the coronavirus has shown the importance of building lasting infrastructure and partnerships to deal with regional health challenges. The women and children of Australia's most important neighbours have been found to be very much suffering as a result of the slashing of the health and education budgets in particular. You've really got to ask: how can the Pacific step-up be effective if we cut aid to Vanuatu by 42 per cent or aid to Samoa by 14 per cent? Cutting health assistance to Samoa by 36 per cent in the aftermath of the measles epidemic has to raise serious questions about this government's intent.

The Morrison government's ongoing review of aid policy will be nothing but window-dressing if it fails to address the impact of the coalition's aid cuts on Australia's national interests. The Minister for International Development and the Pacific is present in the chamber, and I hope he is listening very carefully. I've talked a bit about the Pacific, but I was recently in Timor-Leste and the cuts to their budget are also deeply regrettable. Timor-Leste is a very near nation with which we have a very special relationship. Having supported Timor-Leste to become a growing independent nation, the idea that we would cut their budget and put at risk, in any way, shape or form, their growing from strength to strength at a time when they are asking for assistance—it really is a diabolical situation. It's to this government's great shame that they have not been able to explain adequately to the Australian people the incredible significance of aid for our relationships in this region. (Time expired)

See this speech in context