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.