Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Hansard source

Before some close analysis and scrutiny of what Labor has committed to in international development in the Pacific, I want to highlight some of the incredible investments the coalition made in this space whilst in power. We were able to increase aid funding to the Pacific, which reached a record high of $1.721 billion in 2020-21. We supported economic growth and connectivity through electrification and undersea cabling initiatives through the $3 billion Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific.

COVID 19 was a remarkably tough time for Australia and, of course, for the wider region and the whole world, but I'm proud that even when we experienced our own problems we didn't turn our back on our neighbours. I recall the then member for Flinders and minister for health going out of his way to ensure that vaccinations went to the Pacific, so that we did what we should do as good neighbours. The government committed an additional $1 billion in aid funding over four years to support the region's pandemic response. That support included sharing more than 40 million COVID vaccine doses with Pacific and South-East Asian countries and the provision of essential medical equipment and training, and laboratory and technical support.

When it came to food security and humanitarian support, in 2021 Australia provided $173.4 million in funding for nutrition and food security, more than $541 million in funding for humanitarian, emergency and refugee programs. In the March 2022-23 budget, the government pledged $145 million for protracted humanitarian crises, including in Ukraine, Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar, and $40 million to the United Nations World Food Programme.

Now let us look ahead and put the Albanese government under the microscope. Firstly, most importantly and most urgently is famine. Fifty million people are on the brink of starvation in 45 countries; 10,000 children are dying every day from hunger. NGOs collectively asked Australia for $150 million. The government committed just $15 million, the same amount it committed to upgrading a sporting complex in the Macedon Ranges in Victoria. I'd like to know what informed the government's decision to provide just 10 per cent of that request. Canada has provided A$287 million to the global hunger crisis. The US has given A$715 million. Australia's $15 million is just two per cent of the United States' contribution. Is that really enough, Minister? Does the government have any intention of increasing its funding?

In 2011 more than a quarter of a million people died in Somalia from the famine. In DFAT's own assessments of the food crisis in the Horn of Africa it recognises that, while the government provided the right amount of funding, it was not released quickly enough. NGOs have been raising the alarm on the current hunger crisis for months, yet it took the government until September to release any funding, which was at best inadequate and at worst insulting. Is the government content with the speed at which we are releasing funding to those in need in the Horn of Africa?

Another disaster that deserves more attention is the Pakistan floods. More than 1,700 people have died, and the Australian government has provided just $5 million towards this. We will see related health issues putting stress on the already crippled health system there. Fixing vital infrastructure will take many, many years. Undoubtedly, we will see a rise in terrorism because of these floods, sadly and unfortunately. Minister: is the government really comfortable with a measly $5 million contribution? The United Kingdom government provided the equivalent of A$26 million. The US has provided A$46½ million. Is Australia pulling its weight?

Even when we're allocating this money, we don't seem to be using the most effective mechanisms. The Australian Humanitarian Partnership is a partnership between the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and Australian NGOs. The AHP ensures that when we do allocate money we deliver the most effective, innovative and collaborative humanitarian assistance available. However, the government is failing to use the AHP. Instead, it has given the funding to UN agencies. I would like to know for 2021-22 and 2022-23 what proportion of humanitarian preparedness and response funding was allocated through the AHP. Why is the government using the UN as a middleman instead of giving the funding directly to the NGOs? Whilst we're on the topic of efficient use of funds, I have some questions about Australia's commitment of $17 million for the Pacific Games. I applaud our support of our dear friends in the Solomons. However, I would like to know what that money will go to specifically. Was there a value for assessments completed?

See this speech in context