Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Brandis. Does the government acknowledge concerns by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that the current Ebola outbreak is the worst in history, having killed an estimated 3,000 people and with the potential to infect over one million people by January 2015 if not contained? Considering the recent comments by the United Nations Ebola response leader, Dr David Nabarro, in which he describes Ebola as a greater global threat than terrorism, does the minister accept that we should be fighting the threat of Ebola with the same vigour, aggression and resources with which we are currently combating the global threat of terrorism?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am aware of those observations, and I think to conflate the two is a very foolish thing to do. These are very, very different problems. Of course they are very grave problems. But to conflate or to equate or to suggest an equivalence between these problems is a fool's errand.

The Australian government is making a significant contribution to the fight against Ebola. Australia will provide an additional $10 million to the international response to the Ebola disease outbreak. This will bring Australia's total contribution to the Ebola response to $18 million. That is in addition to the $40 million that Australia provides to the World Health Organization each year to support its global health activities. And, as I am sure Senator Di Natale knows, the World Health Organization prioritises its expenditure and has placed the fight against Ebola at the top of its priorities.

Australia shares the international community's deep concern over the Ebola outbreak and is responding to the United Nations' call for immediate funds through a newly established Ebola Response Multi-Partner Trust Fund. The United States is urgently seeking US$50 million from donors to meet immediate needs over the next four weeks, including for logistics to deliver equipment, materials and supplies to Ebola response operations; establishment and operation of care centres; and care, detection and contact training. Australia will be providing the funds I have mentioned—that is, the $18 million—in special grants immediately.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. You will also note that the US has now sent troops as well as money to build field hospitals and training centres in Liberia. Cuba is sending over 400 medical staff. China in fact is sending a fully equipped laboratory. What is required here is logistics, troops and medical experts. Why isn't the government joining the international community by putting boots on the ground and providing what is really needed to stop the spread of Ebola?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is needed is resources. And it is for each nation, in responding to the United Nations' call, to provide those resources in the way that it is best able. Australia has assessed that the best way it can provide resources is by providing funding; hence our decision to make available an additional $18 million on top of our contribution to the World Health Organization and to make it available immediately. Australia does not have the same capabilities as the United States. Australia does not have the same capabilities as other nations. But what we do have is the capacity to provide funding to support those capabilities. That is a judgement the government has made on the basis of the best advice available to it, including from medical professionals, and it is advice we intend to follow so that we can make our contribution to this effort.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. It is important to note that MSF has rejected Australia's pledge of money because they do not have the capacity to put further medical professionals in the field. They do not want money; they need people, they need logistics. Do you concede that MSF has the relevant expertise to determine the most effective means by which to confront the epidemic and to make a significant difference in managing and fighting Ebola, which will save thousands and possibly millions of lives?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I concede and what I assert is that Australia should make its contribution—and we have, by providing $18 million. And I can tell you something else: Australia will not put Australian citizens at risk in circumstances in which we do not have the capacity to medivac out of West Africa Australians who might contract the Ebola virus—and we do not. Australia does not have the capability to medivac from West Africa an Australian citizen who might fall victim to the Ebola virus. So, what we have decided to do is make a generous contribution, commensurate with our capabilities, which is why we are providing to the front-line agencies $18 million of additional money to confront this epidemic.