Australia, Poverty, and the Sustainable Development Goals
A Response to what the Australian Government writes about Poverty in its Report on the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals
The Australian Government recently delivered its first Voluntary National Review on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. ASAP Oceania has coordinated experts on several aspects of poverty to write brief, accessible responses to what the Australian Government writes about poverty (understood in a broad, multi-dimensional sense) in this Review. The topics covered are Food Security, Indigenous Policy, Children and Families, Foreign Aid, Gender, Housing, Social Policy, and Disability. The Response was published on October 17, 2018, the United Nations International Day for the Eradication of Poverty.
Australian Poverty Audit Mid-Term Review 2017
Released on 20 June 2016, the ASAP Oceania Poverty Audit 2016 explored the implications for poverty of the three major Australian political parties’ policies in key areas—taxation of superannuation, temporary migrants, critical policies for women, asylum seekers and refugees, foreign aid, indigenous affairs, housing affordability, the trans-pacific partnership and welfare policy. This updated report provides a compilation of the ASAP Oceania Poverty Audit 2016 as well as the ASAP Oceania Midterm Review 2017. The midterm review provides an assessment of the policies of the party that won the election. It assesses how the Liberal–National Coalition of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is faring in the key areas that appear in the original audit, 15 months since gaining power. It consists of 500-600 word reviews of what the government has or has not done to take a stand against poverty. We hope that the report will stimulate a robust and rigorous discussion about poverty both in Australia and internationally.
Read More: ASAP_Oceania_midterm poverty review
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.