What about our relations with the rest of the world?

Monday, August 9, 2010

By Tim Costello
CEO World Vision Australia 

The Canberra Times, 9 August 2010

Regardless of who wins the election, in the days following August 21, we are guaranteed to hear about a congratulatory call from US President Obama. The Prime Minister and the President will discuss the war in Afghanistan, and undoubtedly our ‘special relationship’ with ‘our closest ally’ the United States will be reaffirmed.
  
But is that really the extent of Australia’s engagement with the rest of the world? With an election looming, it is little surprise that Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard are focused on domestic issues. But the campaign has passed its halfway point, and the fact we have made it this far without any serious discussion of international affairs beyond Aussie troops and Aussie borders is concerning.

As campaign rhetoric is ramped up, the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition are keen to talk about the ‘kind of world we want our children to live in’. But what they really mean is the ‘kind of Australia we want our children to live in’.

This is a flawed approach. Global issues are, by definition, Australian issues. Why then has there been so little discussion about our place in the world?

Whoever the new Prime Minister is, they will need to quickly concentrate their energies on a far broader range of issues, as there are a raft of crucial international meetings before year’s end.

There are only five years left until the 2015 deadline to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, the blueprint to halve global poverty. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has called on world leaders to attend a summit in New York in September to accelerate progress towards these goals. For a new Australian Prime Minister looking to make their global debut, I can think of no more important forum than one dedicated to improving the lives of the world’s poor.

In November the Korean hosts of the G20 meeting will foster renewed discussions on development issues, regarding them to be essential to rebalancing the global economy. They have recognised that ‘rebalancing’ encompasses more than macroeconomic imbalances. It also includes addressing gaps in income and development. 

Many G20 nations suffered during the Global Financial Crisis. Even though the United Kingdom is haemorrhaging money, the leaders of both parties had the vision and global understanding to protect overseas aid. Yet Australia, fortunate enough to emerge from the GFC largely unscathed, will attend the meeting still wallowing at 16th place in overseas aid spending among developed nations. 
While both major parties have committed to increase the aid budget to 0.5 percent of the Gross National Income (GNI) by 2015, more needs to be done. We can afford to commit 70 cents in every $100 of Gross National Income to helping lift developing countries out of poverty. It’s disappointing that neither major party has yet released its official policy on foreign aid.

Whoever wins the election must ensure that Australia does not just engage with the international community when it suits us – we have to be part of the difficult conversations too.

The Copenhagen climate change meetings were a setback, but Australia must continue to work with the international community towards a fair, ambitious and binding global climate change agreement comes by the end of 2012.

In December we get our next chance, when UN climate change talks resume in Cancun, Mexico. Australia is already falling short of funding commitments made in Copenhagen to help developing countries adapt to climate change and achieve low-carbon development. This week’s Pacific Islands Forum focused on governance in the region, and finalising a free trade agreement. Australia will benefit from both. 

But our reputation among Pacific Island leaders is being eroded by Australia’s ongoing reluctance to commit adequate funds to support climate change adaptation efforts in the region. In many poor countries local World Vision staff are already noticing less predictable rainfall, increases in storm ferocity and salt water seeping into crops. As a wealthy polluting country, we have a responsibility – and an interest – in doing our fair share to address these issues.

East Timor presents a similar contradiction. It is a desperately poor country: the under-five mortality rate is 93 babies per 1,000 live births. Rather than focusing discussions on asylum seeker processing, Australia should be addressing the need for basic child and maternal health interventions. At least 20% of Australia’s aid budget should be spent on strengthening health systems in countries like East Timor. Such moves would demonstrate a more nuanced and consistent approach to global engagement, one based on being a true partner.

The world views of the respective candidates matter, and foreign affairs deserves a more prominent place in this election campaign. Whoever succeeds will need to build bridges to the international community. We have nothing to fear from an ambitious, compassionate international agenda – to the contrary, it is essential to Australia’s future prosperity.

Opinion Pieces, Poverty, Asia and the Pacific, AUSAID, Australian Government, Election, Foreign Aid, G20, Millennium Development Goals, President Obama, Tim Costello, United Nations

Back to all Results