Overseas aid at an all-time low and outrage is absent

As Alan Austin points out, Australia’s generosity to the world’s poor is no longer newsworthy.

WHEN Abbott State incision Almost a billion dollars in projected foreign aid allocations in 2014, Sydney Morning Herald We welcome this terrible decision ‘Foreign aid budget drops to lowest level in Australian history’.

A companion piece was titled: ‘Australia’s foreign aid cuts: A long-term disaster’.

ABC News He announced the decision as follows:

‘Budget 2014: Aid groups express anger over cuts to foreign aid spending.’

SBS announced:

‘Aid groups have been “gutted” by foreign aid cuts.’

However, this year, at a time when aid decreased even more compared to national income, almost no voice was heard.

Public interest in aid gradually diminished. There are at least three reasons for this.

The demise of Australia’s charities

Throughout the 1970s, 80s and 90s, overseas charities featured prominently in Australia’s cultural life, mainstream news and other media.

Evacuation of pro-American citizens from Saigon in 1976 fleets Ships large and small sailing from Vietnam to Australia are enthusiastically supported by aid agencies. fraser State.

Thirty years ago, World Vision’s annual 40 Hour Famine It was the nation’s largest community event, with millions of sponsors donating money to hundreds of thousands of people, mostly young people, who went without solid food for a weekend. This topic was covered for 40 hours on nearly every radio and television news network and on many variety shows.

This fundraiser brought in $7.4 million in 1991, which was a lot of money at the time. This figure dropped to $2.2 million in 2016 and is no longer included in annual reports.

through Howard From 1996 to 2007, most charities shifted their focus from raising public funds to receiving government grants. The swap for free public money was the end of advocacy condemning governments for aid cuts. And so it was.

World Vision Tim Costello accepted In 2012 this:

“Charities receive up to 90% of their budget from the government. At some point, they cross the line from being clear, independent, focused and fearless about their purpose, to being completely singled out and captured.”

Therefore, the profile of charities today is much lower. Occasional pleas on behalf of the world’s poor media releases It rarely attracts attention.

Fundraising proceeds confirm this. World Vision’s calls created $126.7 million in 2024, which is about $6 million below 2023 revenue. This is down from $242.4 million in 2024. 2013.

This is the first reason why aid cuts are now unchallenged, which is a shame, because institutions are actually doing phenomenally well. good results.

Help works. Who is Woodathort?

As recently as 2012, Australia allocated $32.7 million to development programs in China, $3.5 million to Malaysia, $1.76 million to Peru and $1.5 million to Costa Rica. All four of these countries now rank among the UN’s top 80 countries economically progress and they are now net aid donors.

Thanks to decades of bilateral and multilateral aid programs, fewer countries now face severe poverty. That’s why the urgent lifesaving calls to Ethiopia in 1983, North Korea in the mid-1990s, South Sudan in 1998, and Somalia in 2011 are rarer and less heartbreaking.

This is the second reason why development aid cuts are less newsworthy.

Australia’s creeping stinginess

May Budget It allocated $5,097 million in aid for 2025-26, an increase of $135.8 million from last year. This is only a small portion of the $5,052 allocated. Julia GillardLast budget in 2012-13. aspect percentage Gross national income (GNI) – a historical and international comparison of generosity – is 0.18%, the lowest since records have been kept. See the table below.

Insensitive Coalition’s commitment to cuts

The third factor encouraging thrift is the absence of any pushback from the Opposition. Coalition Before May Elections signaled Another $813 million in aid will be cut over four years, while its immediate neighbors are quarantined from cuts.

It would be great if that was one reason why the Coalition lost so badly, but we’ll never know.

The focus of Australia’s aid is changing

Both sides of Australian politics are committed to continuing support for development in the Asia-Pacific region.

11 of Australia’s top 20 aid-receiving countries are near-Pacific neighbours. Four of these are in South East Asia and three are in Central Asia. Only Gaza and Afghanistan are further away. See the table below.

This is a change from 20 or even ten years ago. Ten years ago, the top 20 countries receiving aid included Pakistan, Syria, Nepal, Kenya and Zimbabwe. Twenty years ago, these countries included Iraq, China, Thailand, India and South Africa.

Targets are constantly missed

Australia’s proudest era of good global citizenship whitlam Years when 0.6% of GNP was allocated to overseas development. With the UN global target of 0.7%, this places Australia among the world leaders.

It declined from this point onwards, with the Fraser Government reducing the rate to 0.45% during its term. This was brought up via hawke/Keating years of study, but never returned Whitlam’s generosity. This pattern has been repeated ever since. Howard reduced aid again, then Rudd and Gillard partially restored it. Abbott, turnbull And morrison I cut it further, then Albanian He restored some of them to their former state.

highest charitable organization, Australian Council for International Developmenthas now shifted the target from a percentage of GNP to a percentage of the total federal budget. They want 1 percent. The current level is 0.65%.

They will never achieve this unless there is a miraculous revival of the aid sector.

Alan Austin is an Independent Australian columnist and freelance journalist. You can follow him on X/Twitter @alanaustin001. He worked on World Vision Australia’s media team from 1996 to 2003.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.