Poverty - our moral failure

Australia has a lot for which it can be proud.

We have produced leaders in business, academia and sport. We were one of the first nations to give women the vote as well as the right to be elected to parliament. Australia also broke new ground by introducing a minimum wage that was “fair and reasonable”.

As a nation we revel in The Lucky Country tag. It was penned by Donald Horne back in 1964, and was meant to be an indictment of the country. Other nations were clever - we were lucky. Our achievements, our “luck” and our sense of “a fair ago” are the bedrock of our nation’s psyche. We believe ourselves to be fair, egalitarian and generous.

Yet behind the Aussie fair-go ethic is a nagging question: just how generous are we? And: how do we compare with other nations in our giving?

Well, now we can answer this because the figures are out. A new report released in the United Kingdom by the Charities Aid Foundation has reviewed and compared the giving of individuals who live in the world’s wealthiest countries.

On overall private giving to those in need, at home and overseas, Australians come in fourth after United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. Private giving by Australians reached 0.69 per cent of our GDP. (This compared to 1.67 per cent for the US, 0.73 per cent for the UK and Canada at 0.72 per cent.)

But we know from other studies that Australia rises even higher when its level of private giving to overseas aid is compared. Australians rank only second to the Irish when it comes to giving to the one billion people on the planet who live in extreme poverty.

I believe Australians understand that while we are an island nation we cannot ignore the fact we are global citizens. Australians understand that we cannot win a war on terrorism unless we wage a war against poverty. Too often the slums of the world’s poorest countries can become the recruiting grounds for terrorists and their ideology of hate. Too often parents in these communities are robbed of hope that their children can get educated or even get adequate healthcare.

But while Australia has much to be proud of in terms of our private giving the level our government gives to overseas aid compares poorly. Australia currently ranks 19 out of 22 rich nations for the amount of aid our government gives as a proportion of gross national income (GNI). Between 1996-97 and 2006-2007, the government gave $4.5 billion less to aid than they would have if they maintained the same levels as when they came to power.

Almost 30 years ago world leaders agreed that if the world’s richest nations gave 1 per cent of the gross national income we could end extreme poverty.

It was believed that 0.3 per cent should come from private individuals and businesses. Privately Australians are giving generously, particularly those on the $40,000 to $50,000 per annum incomes. I do fear that the contribution of business and the mega rich, however, has failed to match the generosity of everyday Australians.

It was envisioned that the remaining 0.7 per cent should come from the governments of wealthy countries. Since 1969 most governments have repeatedly promised to give 0.7 per cent of GNI in overseas aid - including our own.

Yet even with the 2005 announcement by Prime Minister John Howard that the government would almost double our overseas aid budget - it will only take us to 0.36 per cent of GNI.

The funding shortfall is tragic because we know increased aid can strike a blow against poverty. Eminent economist Jeffrey Sachs has argued that if the world’s richest nations took overseas aid spending to even 0.5 per cent of GNI by 2010 it would halve the one billion people who are “living” on less than $US1 a day.

In 2005 the world gave $US106.8 billion in aid when $140 billion is needed to make extreme poverty history. To put this in perspective the US has spent $180 billion a year for the last three years in Iraq.

Over the last year we have seen global warming shoot to the top of this nation’s political agenda. This is because it is a clear moral challenge and an issue we can and must address. Indeed we know that climate change will have disastrous implications for the world’s poorest communities.

Yet the commitment required to eradicate global poverty is modest compared to the cost we will have to endure in combating climate change. In 20 years time I suspect that we will be shocked at how modest the request of 0.7 per cent is from the poorest trying to survive and keep their children alive. In requesting 0.7 per cent they did not ask us to give up our second cars or coal fired power stations, holiday homes and consumer excesses but just show a little charity that we could easily afford.

We are making progress in the war against chronic poverty. In the late 1950s poverty killed up to 50,000 children a day - today it kills 30,000. And now this generation has the capacity and the resources to end chronic poverty in our time.

World Vision will continue to work with the Australian public to fight the causes of poverty in our world. But we will also highlight that it was not the public or aid organisations that signed up to the commitment to boost aid to 0.7 per cent. It was our government and our failure to act on this continues to be a moral failure for our nation.