|
|
AUSTRALIA: Aid to Iraq Hides Falling Generosity - Analysts
By Sonny Inbaraj
PERTH, Australia, Apr 28 (IPS) - Though Australia's recent pledge of some
51 million U.S. dollars for humanitarian relief in war-ravaged Iraq seems
laudable, Canberra's purse strings are actually becoming tighter as the
country heads toward the bottom of the aid donors' list, analysts here say.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer last month announced an 83 million
Australian dollar (51 million U.S. dollar) commitment to the U.N.
FlashAppeal for Iraq, adding to the 17.5 million Australian dollars (10.6
million U.S. dollars) already provided to other U.N. agencies, the Red
Cross and Australian non-government aid agencies for humanitarian work in
the country.
''Australia's contribution so far is a tangible demonstration of our
commitment to meet the vital humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people,'' said
Downer.
Christine Gallus, the parliamentary secretary for foreign affairs,
explained that the 51 million U.S. dollars was outside Australia's aid
budget, and that half the money was from the government's aid arm, the
Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID).
''We have that line in the AusAID budget because some years, often there
is this type of humanitarian need - it could be because of a cyclone in
the Pacific or a war in some country where Australia is asked to contribute
to the humanitarian need which we normally wouldn't have budgeted for,''
she pointed out.
Added Gallus: ''So because of that we put money aside in a humanitarian
budget to actually answer those sort of needs and that is exactly what that
money was there for and that's why it has gone to Iraq.''
But analysts were not impressed.
On the contrary, they said Iraq was a one-off case and revealed that
Australia's generosity ranked one of the lowest among the countries of the
Organisation of Economic Development (OECD) group of industrialised nations.
''Well, I think in Iraq you take it step-by-step. The government made a
sensible first step - the money is there in that contingency fund and that
has been allocated to Iraq and they've given an extra 83 million Australian
dollars (51 million U.S. dollars),'' said Tim Colebatch, economics editor
of 'The Age' newspaper.
But Colebatch said his concern was the overall level of Australian aid
and the proportion of national income spent to create a better life for
people overseas. ''We are spending only half as much now, half the
proportion we used to spend in the sixties and seventies, when we had half
as much money. We certainly had a shift in the wrong direction,'' he said.
''The Netherlands and Sweden, for instance, have similar per capita
incomes to Australia but they give much more in overseas aid compared to
us,'' Colebatch pointed out.
Australia's total overseas development assistance (ODA) in the 2002-2003
budget amounted to 1.8 billion Australian dollars (1.09 billion U.S.
dollars) or 0.25 percent of the Gross National Income (GNI).
In 2000 Prime Minister John Howard with some 148 other world leaders
adopted the Millennium Development Goals, which were eight specific targets
for international development, drawing on the outcomes of a decade of
development summits.
The cornerstone of these eight millennium goals was to halve world
poverty by 2015. To do that, the World Bank said, nations would have to
double their aid - from about 50 billion U.S. dollars a year to about a
100 billion U.S. dollars a year.
OECD members, in turn, agreed to a target of 0.7 percent of their GNI
going toward overseas aid.
The government recently and formally stated that Australia would
continue to support the 0.7 percent target, ''consistent with the needs of
partner countries and our own economic circumstances and capacity to assist''.
In February, Trade Minister Mark Vaile noted that ''Australia has one of
the fastest-growing economies in the developed world, with the
second-highest productivity growth in the OECD''.
But the Australian Council for Overseas Aid (ACFOA), a consortium of
non-government groups involved in overseas relief work, hit back in its
submission to the 2003-2004 budget that is to be debated in Parliament next
month.
''Since 1970, per capita wealth in Australia has almost doubled, yet
during the same period our aid has halved from 0.5 percent to 0.25 percent
of GNI,'' said ACFOA. ''Given our current economic circumstances, we simply
cannot argue that Australia does not have the capacity to provide more
assistance.''
Arguing for Australia to give its fair share of overseas aid, ACFOA said
the current 0.25 percent of GNI placed the country 14th out of the 22 OECD
donor nations and well below half the OECD target of 0.7 percent GNI.
''Moreover, Australia's generosity is declining relative to other donors
and we will soon be among the lowest of OECD donor countries,'' warned
ACFOA in its budget statement.
In its budget submission, ACFOA also urged the government to act on its
commitments to reduce poverty and to achieve the millennium goals and its
recent recommitment to the OECD aid target of 0.7 percent of GNI.
''ACFOA believes that 0.7 percent of GNI is a level of aid commensurate
with Australia's level of economic development and our national interest in
real poverty reduction in our region and around the world,'' said the NGO
consortium.
'The Age' economics editor Colebatch also believes that Australia, so
far a reluctant combatant against world poverty, now has to chance to play
a more meaningful role.
''The Treasurer (Peter Costello) is not likely to make big changes this
year. But his government is in a position to make a long-term commitment.
At least Australia could pledge to play its part in halving world poverty
by gradually doubling aid to 0.5 percent of our income over the next
decade,'' he said.
''It would be a wonderful message to the world's poor that we will be
there for them,'' Colebatch explained. (END/2003)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is RSS?
