I'm really hoping the Labour government upholds their election promise to increase international aid in the 2012-2013 budget. There has been a pretty big emphasis on reaching surplus and cutting wherever possible, I hope they don't forget the turmoil the rest of the world is currently in.

I'm pretty sure we only give 0.35% of the national budget to international aid and it was promised to increase this to 0.5%.

I suppose it is not only about the money, but the effectiveness. We need more than the "throw money at it until it goes away" attitude. Our government needs to commit to combating global poverty.

I know we have our tough times here, but I think we can make more sacrifices to help out our friends offshore.

You have to be kidding.They are borrowing money in your name to keep you as their debt slave.You already owe $16,000 + interest as an individual because of the labor lunacy.Labour debt $160 billion and growing by $ 100 million per day.

You don't borrow money to give it away.

A rich country like Australia should be putting at least the UN-recommended 0.7% of GDP into international aid.

Hear this message.
You cannot afford to give aid.

YOU DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY !

As a country we could give a lot more aid. Just close the Climate Change gravy train and you free up billions. The only problem is that most of us have little confidence that the money wont go to highly paid bureaucrats and corrupt third world leaders. INdia has many millionares and yet many wont help their own people.

After the climate change gravy train has been derailed, it will be time to get the big one.

Yes time to stop the UN gravy train. Rather than listening to it's recommendation on aid, we should resign from this huge corrupt bureaucracy, & keep all the money at home.

Perhaps when we stop hearing all the clamoring for more money for some home grown need, or perceived need, we could look at some foreign aid again, until then forget it.

Our thread starter must be shaking the head now.
Forgive them they know not what they say.
Australia is far from broke.
Aid is many things, still giggling at the idea we are broke.
John Howard founded schools and education in Indonesia.
To educate kids keeping them away from terrorists, Abbott and a third of posters here wanted it stopped!
So aid saves lives, it educates, it grows country's so boats may not need to leave that shore.
Aid is a basic a AUSTRALIAN MATE SHIP, it kept our prisoners of the Japanese alive, we share.
Do not worry Labor gives what it can every time, but if one year is short at least we give.
And I ask the let them feed them selves mob what will you do if the boats come with guns?

Necastle SWDane,
I just occured to me. The amount we are spending on saving, transporting, processing, housing and settling the illegal boat arrivals should be classified as foreign aid. After all they are foreigners.

Take all that into account and our expenditure on foreign aid will be well up on the previous government. No need for you to be concerned, just look at next budget.

Banjo, yes I almost posted the same sort of thing this morning. The huge expenditure on asylum seekers could well be considered international aid.

I wonder what portion of our GDP has been spent on aid in the last twelve months if this is factored in?

Onshore asylum seeking should be shut down. Then this level of expenditure should be diverted to our formal international aid programs, especially targeted at the causal factors of refugeeism and the development of sustainable societies….and the accommodation of an increased number of refugees brought to Australia within our formal immigration program.

Newcastle SWdane.
please forgive us, see like it or not most here and in the country, remember we grow as we age less interested in our youthful thoughts.
Dislike and do not want any boat people arriving here.
Ludwig and I question can our country continue to grow unchecked forever.
How about sustainability.
While share holders/land developers others interested in by product of growth, want the Rich's it brings and who cares about the future.
We know how much it costs far too much, we suspect it need not be so.
In my view we gather on different sides of the river to throw stones, some saying Kevin Rudd got it wrong, yes he did, but lets pretend Howard got it right always.
I happen to think Tiny Target Tony uses the issue, to further his race to become the worst Prime Minister this country ever had.
A mountain he must work hared to climb over Gillard for, he can do it,he already holds worst opposition ever by miles.
Yes aid can, in some minds be told to walk the plank, after all we do not stand in front of children dieing mums too dads killing them selves only numbers after all.

Belly,
You said "Dislike and do not want any boat people arriving here.
Ludwig and I question can our country continue to grow unchecked forever.
How about sustainability"

I too share that view, but am a little more blunt, and accurate, in describing the 'illegals' who I see as deceitful shonks who take advantage of our generosity. I am quite happy to see the arrival of genuine refugees but am now a bit wary as some are not showing good signs of integrating. Perhaps the social change is too great for some.

You also said "In my view we gather on different sides of the river to throw stones, some saying Kevin Rudd got it wrong, yes he did, but lets pretend Howard got it right always".

Howard got it right eventually and I was critical of the time it took them. They took years to come up with the right policies that stopped the illegals from coming and probably then only by accident. May take tougher measures now to acheive the same.

World population is the big stumbling block in sustainability and I think we should look to Iran in how to reduce birth rates and encourage that in our foreign aid.

<< World population is the big stumbling block in sustainability and I think we should look to Iran in how to reduce birth rates and encourage that in our foreign aid. >>

Absolutely Banjo.

In fact, this should be the CORE issue within our aid programs, as a fundamental part of the achievement of sustainable societies.

Maximised effort is needed to address family planning, availability of contraception, education for women and girls and other measures that will slow population growth and achieve stable populations or populations that are gently reducing in size.

It is very much the nature of aid as well as the size of the aid budget that matters. In fact, it is all-important. So much so that I’d more than happy if our aid budget wasn’t increased at all, just as long as it was reoriented towards achieving sustainability.

I believe that anything to do with the reduction of population growth is actually completely omitted from our current aid programs! In fact, sustainability is not a consideration at all.

Even worse; the manner in which our aid money is spent actually promulgates continuous growth and the world’s antisustainable momentum.

Ah ha! one of my favourite subjects. I've been holding off to see where the wind blows. I see it blows back towards the land.

AID: money we give to poor countries to help their people. Well that's the theory at least.

How is your AID money spent. Paying for CEO's to live in 5 star Hotel, Fly first class, Hire limousines, Bribe Foreign Government officials, Pay inflated Import/storage/trucking fees. Pay off warlords & terrorists highway check points, pay the village head man the balance to distribute the remainder. remainder... what remainder. Of course he get to keep most of the aid for his family first.

When you see TV/Photo shots. Remember these are staged in order to tug at your heart strings. It is vital to keep the funds flowing so these agencies CEO's can live in luxury.

Western Government AID: Here's an example. Where is all the Aid for Haiti? It's sitting on the Dock still. Why? Because the Government of Haiti won't release it, because the Agencies refuse to pay huge Bribes to the Dock workers & the Haitian Government (the President)

When Aid is given to Bangladesh for flood victims. "Imagine if YOUR house was washed away in a flood." That's what the ad says. Except that their house is about 4 meters square & made of grass & saplings. Not Bricks & mortar like your house. It's the Government officials that pocket all the money, except for the photo opportunity for our TV.
Cont.

Cont.
A few years ago (2003) Australia purchased 48 SU-27's & SU-35's for the Indonesian Air Force. Well, not directly. 3 months before the Indonesian announcement, Australia gave the Indonesian Government the purchase price of the Jets in Foreign AID to help their people. Go figure.

All those children Bob Geildolf saved in the Horn of Africa are now running around in boats terrorizing the high seas off their coast. Others are running the Terrorists gangs fighting the West.

Where is the AID from the rich oil Countries? There is none. It's the west’s job to supply that in the form of the Jizyah Tax. That's the Tax non-Muslims have to pay to Islam to be allowed to live.

Australia need to immediately stop all non-essential Aid to foreign Countries. Essential Aid is for Catastrophes such as Tidal Waves or Cyclones. Australia’s Hospitals/Health service, Schools & School system, Trade Training, Aged Care, Road/Rail infrastructure, Communication infrastructure is in a dilapidated state. This money we are giving away is urgently needed to be spent in Australia.

An old saying, "You cannot help others if you cannot help yourself."

Please don't say, "you don't know that," because I damm well do know that.

Jayb,
There is no doubt that you have researched your suject and I suspect are able to substantiate your claims. Most people are aware generally that much foreign aid is wasted and does not reach those in most need. Hence I doubt if you will get much arguement in relation to better management of the aid we give. However you may find some strong arguements against your views that our aid should be restricted entirely to catasrophies.

Have you looked at how the Iranies lowered their birth rate? simply google Iran birth rates or similar to find. Basicly it shows that Iran went from about 6.5 babies per woman to about 1.7 per woman. They did this entirely by education and the provision of the means for contraception. Imagine the difference when far fewer mouths have to share the same amount of food.

I think that encouraging that sort of action in those countries of high birth rates and/or subject to famine is a worth while foreign aid objective. It seems entirely missing now.

Am interested in your views on this.

Thank you Banjo. Most of what I know about the Aid we send is from personal experience, though dated now, but I suspect that nothing has changed & has become worse. Indonesia even threatened Australia when we hinted that we might cut down our Aid to their country. (about the middle of last year.)
Education for third world countries is good. Let them provide it, not spend it on a huge Army buying Tanks & Aircraft they can't afford to run. We provide Aid to set up schools in Indonesia & they set up Madras’s. (Religious schools that teach about death to the infidel, us.)
These countries Leaders squirrel away millions for themselves through not spending their own countries money on the people & bribes (fees) to distribute our Aid.
Banjo: However you may find some strong arguments against your views that our aid should be restricted entirely to catastrophes.
Why? These people put their heads in the sand. Mostly Greenies/Feel good types that don’t want to know the truth because it would hurt their sensibilities.

cont.
Banjo: Imagine the difference when far fewer mouths have to share the same amount of food.
I agree. Do you remember there was a survival strategy game came out many years ago. Basically it was about humans, Deer & wolves. (Conservation for the Greenie types) If there were too many Deer they ate the crops of the humans & they starved & died. If the hunters killed the dear then the Wolves attacked the humans for food. If the wolves killed too many Deer then they starved. If the humans shot the wolves then the Deer multiplied & over populated & got sick & died. The object of the game was to keep an equilibrium. It was very hard. Thrown in extra was Fire, Floods, Drought, etc.
Well it works in real life. We save the starving Africans they breed more & then we have twice as many to save, ditto, ditto. Then wars start over scant resources & any Aid we provide. Any Aid provided adds to the problem exponentially. Meanwhile we are draining our own resources for no real effect. We will end up where they are in a few years time.
This is so sad, but unfortunately, that’s real life.

Jayb,
I would be interested in how you got your first hand experience, if you can do that. The opposition to your views on foreign aid would come from bleeding hearts and a wealth of bureaucrats and current/former ministers who have enjoyed the first class travel and accomadation, the UN social events and cocktail parties, etc. They are reluctant to forgo all that.

Relating to education, I was specificly referring to sex education/family planning in Iran and I hope you would take a little time to aquaint yourself, I found it interesting about what can be achieved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_planning_in_Iran

Yes the survival game works in the real world. The more we feed people the more they breed. So we are making the situation worse in the long term. Family planning is the key.

Can you provide media links to the Indonesian threat and any other matters pertaining to this suject.

I disagree with jayb But agree with banjo and Ludwig.
Banjo I know most boat people are shonks.
I have, time and again, told of the simple truth they spend about 5 to ten years average wages in the country's the leave, to come here.
Form communes and the real poor never get a chance.
Now the costs, are more than our annual spend on aid, willing to bet we will only know years after.
But remember Howard spent aid well on the mentioned things above.
Aid can save lives offer hope and stop terrorism.

Townsville Daily Bulletin 29 Apr 2003. Indon Jet Purchase.
“Military experts played down the threat to Australia from Indonesian plans to buy one of the World’s most advanced fighter-bombers from Russia.” It goes on. Sorry I have only a Photocopy of the article & it won’t let me attach it to the post.
3 years in SE Asia with the Army. One of our Company Duties was to look after a village. When the Poms pulled out of Malaysia we had to take on an extra village. We went to the village. did an assessment & came back with the materials to rebuild the school, repair the boats & the nets & seed rice because the fields had not been planted for some years. The head man refused the Aid saying, "you just bring me the money & I will give it out to where I think it's needed." meaning. I get half then my brother gets half of that then the rest is passed on & divided again. He refused the material help & complained to the Australian High Commissioner. The High Commissioner came down & abused us for refusing to hand out the Aid. So we took him to the village & showed him the Aid & explained why it was refused. He didn't apologize & left without making any further comment. I have witnessed villages swept away. They just gather up material that was washed downstream to them & rebuild their mud daub & thatched huts again. No aid get to them except for some Photo opportunities to please YOU.
I could go on & on but that would get boring for you & me.

Jayb, good posts.

So there should be a huge proviso to our aid expenditure - that we get a guarantee or as close to it as possible that our money will be properly and efficiently used.

If we can’t get this, which you indicate that in many instances we can’t, then no money gets sent!! Our expenditure then gets refined into projects where we know it is being well spent.

Yes there is merit in stopping aid until we get our own house in order, with so much in need of big expenditure domestically.

So perhaps a compromise is in order. Let’s say that 0.7% should be our minimum aid contribution when our own economy, infrastructure, services, environment and future outlook are in good nick. So half of that should be contributed in the meantime, which is pretty much as it now is.

Of course, expenditure in this country and our aid expenditure should both be very strongly geared towards the same critical goal – the achievement of sustainable societies.

Indeed, it makes little sense for Australia to have this goal with its aid programs if we are going to continue to be so utterly antisustainable at home. We need to set a good example.

So it shouldn’t be a matter of us spending much more on aid versus us spending nothing on aid and hunkering down on our domestic issues that scream out for much-increased funding. It should be a case of both a significant aid expenditure and domestic expenditure, with the baseline objectives of stabilising population, balancing resource demand and ongoing renewable supply capability, and achieving sustainable societies, nations and planet.

It would be good if the instigator of this thread commented on the post thus far and put forward reasons as to why he wants an increase in funding for foreign aid.

Does not appear there are many advocates for increased foreign aid.

It will be interesting, in light of todays anouncement, that Asylum seekers will be billeted with Australian families. I take it that all the bleeding hearts will be putting their hands up, considering there is a $300 board payment. I wonder if that each. Hmm let's see a family of 5. Wow! that's $1500 a week. Why go to work.
I wonder just how many non-Muslims do-gooders, who advocate the whole sale import of Asylum seekers, will be straining at the bit to be included in the hosting program.
Yair right!

Aid that helps developing nations become sustainable is worthy or when providing other essentials during crises.

However it is not just corrupt governments and bureaucrats that can cause problems of distribution. Australian governments are not averse to using using 'aid' to further certain political or diplomatic outcomes. Howard used the threat of withdrawal of aid (such as East Timor) to muzzle dissenters.

The best sort of Aid is the non-bandaid variety, that which levels the playing field and puts the interest of the locals first. Aid that constitutes bribery, where governments act in concert with 'some' corporations to plunder developing nations, is not really aid in a country where there is little governance and where corruption is rife.

That sort of aid creates a vicious cycle perpetuating the status quo and does little for the citizens.

Aid are essential to save life,I agree that the delivery must be done without wasting the resources.The same criticism of use of tax payer money,that many of commentators had post here is a valid one,and for all others government spending.
How you really control local government spending for example? The state and the bureaucrats citizen don't even go to council meeting!
Aid is more important that ever as what you do for others will be done to you!Nation now pour will remember who help them.
Some of you had connected Aid with forced abortion as a form of help,that is a crime against humanity,word wide especially rick country are facing now the result of that wrong politic.
They face unsustainable demand for the old population and lack of labour (see Germany).The Aid to the needing must be increase and in long term will be a blessing as Australia will benefit in the future, with economical positive interchange and politically will be better respect,consequently political weight in the world.
As Christian I firmly include AID as a command from God: second commandment "Love your neighbour as yourself" = if you was the one sick,hungry,thirsty. How you be like to be treat?
Grace and peace,ciao

luigi gigi,

'As Christian I firmly include AID as a command from God: second commandment "Love your neighbour as yourself" = if you was the one sick,hungry,thirsty. How you be like to be treat?
Grace and peace,ciao'

Could not agree more luigi however the command is to Christians not for the Government to use tax payer money on many dubious progams. The command is for beleivers to be generous and sacrificial in their giving. Far better to support programs where people can be ministered to body, soul and spirit for lasting results. Their are numerous ministries working for the poor that we can all donate to. Secular Governments are bad at giving aid, bad at education and often have few godly values.

The author of this thread will be dissappointed, the government has not increased foreign aid this year.

That saved $3 billion expenditure for next financial year.

Charities that work overseas are not impressed.

Yeah runner,

There is also a commandment about not killing. I am only aware of a couple of sects that forbid their members to hold combatant roles.

When "christians" start acting like the "commandments" are more than suggestions, I might consider them.

Rusty.

luigi gigi: second commandment "Love your neighbour as yourself"

Second Comandment? 2 Cmd is, "No Images." The one you quoted is the one from Jesus. & you a good Italian Catholic school boy.

Rusty: There is also a commandment about not killing.

1st. Cmd broken, by Ra Moses, when he ordered his bro to massacre the Idolators.

Banjo: saved $3 billion expenditure for next financial year.

Great stuff! One of the suggestions I sent to every Politician I could. "Charity begins at home." If you can't look after yourself then you have no hope of helping others.

Banjo: Charities that work overseas are not impressed.

Of course not. They'll lose their lucrative salaries.

Pelican: That sort of aid creates a vicious cycle perpetuating the status quo and does little for the citizens.

You are so right.