Australian Poverty Audit 2016
As election day fast approaches, ASAP Oceania questions what the three major political parties are doing to address poverty in Australia and beyond through the international aid program. Looking beyond the jobs and growth rhetoric, the contributors in this poverty audit provide snapshot assessments of policy announcements made by the three major parties’ during the 2016 election campaign. Since the report is put together on a voluntary basis, its coverage is by no means comprehensive, and certain important areas have been omitted. Nevertheless, we hope that these invaluable insights into what is at stake for many Australians will move this discussion on poverty and inequality from the periphery to the center of debates about the future of Australia.
Read More: Australian Poverty Audit 2016
Response to the 2014 Australian Budget
The 2014-15 federal budget has several clear and clearly detrimental implications for the poor and marginalized, both in Australia and internationally. The patterns of expenditure that it sets out for the future will reinforce existing trends towards greater inequality in this country and globally. Explicit and implicit cuts to funding to address Indigenous inequality and the enormous cut to the aid budget significantly undermine national commitments to ‘Closing the Gap’ and to the Millennium Development Goals. Rhetorical commitments to ethical principles such as alleviating the most serious global poverty, addressing the uneven global disease burden or ensuring that the first peoples of this country are not permanently marginalized and excluded are only meaningful if they are accompanied by concrete and funded programs to realise them. As such, budgets are significant ethical acts. As Academics Against Poverty, however, we are concerned not only about what the budget does but also about what it says. What it says that economic management, understood through a particular ideological lens, is both the overriding value that steers priorities and the assumed answer to all social ills. Addressing the challenges that confront us requires that we adopt a perspective that shows much greater concern for less advantaged people in Australia and throughout the world and different policy measures that express it. Members of Academics Stand Against Poverty have written brief commentaries on three key areas: aid, indigenous peoples and welfare.
Associate Professor Danielle Celermajer, Co-Chair, ASAP Oceania, University of Sydney
Table of Contents
Nichole Georgeou (Australian Catholic University) and Charles Hawksley (University of Wollongong)
Professor Jon Altman, Australia National University
Ruth Phillips, University of Sydney
Australian Political Party Poverty Audit
Looking toward Australia’s 2013 federal election, ASAP Oceania assembled a group of leading academics to produce this report on the poverty implications of some of the policies of the three major parties: the Labor Party, the Liberal-National Coalition, and the Greens. The report contains 12 short, readable pieces that analyse how the three major parties’ policies are likely to impact poverty in key policy areas such as education, housing, indigenous policy, refugee and asylum seeker policy, and foreign aid.
Our aim is that the report will stimulate discussion about the poverty implications of the policies of the parties that are seeking the votes of Australians. We hope that it will be followed by more pieces by more scholars who wish to add their analyses. Most importantly, we hope that Australians and our neighbours take account of these pieces and insist that the question of poverty in Australia and the world be moved from the remote periphery to the centre of our debates.