We need your help to continue our work as an independent monitor of Australia's aid and trade.Becoming a member is a great way that you can help AID/WATCH continue our important work as the only watchdog of aid, trade and debt in Australia.
AID/WATCH is a member-based organisation. We don't accept money from government and corporations, and strongly rely on donations to ensure our independence.
As a member, you will be kept updated and can join our campaign through newsletters, e-bulletins, action alerts and invitation to events near where you live.
Click on the link below to go to eGive, click on ‘new user’ and choose “memberships” under project name.
Last updated 12 November 2010
Dear All,
The Australian Government has commissioned an Independent Review of Aid Effectiveness. This is our chance to make real changes to Australia’s aid program so that it makes a positive and long-lasting contribution to the lives of the poor.
This year the Australian Government will spend $4.3 billion in aid – and by 2015-16 this is expected to double to over $8 billion. Australia’s aid program can make a huge difference to the lives of millions of people.
Unfortunately, the aid program continues to be driven by Australia’s commercial and strategic interests which means a lot of money ends up in the pockets of Australian consultants and companies – instead of to the people who need it most. Furthermore, lack of transparency hides the reality of how our aid money is being spent.
You can help ensure Australia’s aid money is being spent effectively to build a more sustainable and just world for all by writing a submission to the Independent Review.
Check out our suggested submission and tailor it for yourself or, if you’re busy, just copy it directly. Then email it to submissions [at] aidreview [dot] gov [dot] au Remember to add your name and details at the bottom.
The deadline for submission is 2 February 2011 – This is your chance to have a say.
Together we can work to ensure Australia’s aid makes a valuable contribution to addressing poverty and inequality.
Many thanks for your support!
Warm Regards
Gary, Nishan and the whole AID/WATCH team
PS – It would be great if you could BCC makeaidfair [at] aidwatch [dot] org [dot] au so we know how many people are making submissions
PPS – Forward this link to your friends, the more submissions the better!
PPPS – Support our work to make aid fair by becoming a member, making a donation or joining our e-list
PPPPS - All submissions are treated as public unless indicated otherwise.
To the panel of the Independent Review of Aid Effectiveness,
I call upon the Australian Government to implement the following changes:
Yours Sincerely,
<full name >
<address >
<phone number >
<email address>
The official objective of Australia’s aid program is “to assist developing countries reduce poverty and achieve sustainable development, in line with national interest.”[i] Australia’s aid program should focus on achieving poverty alleviation and sustainable development in accordance with the needs and priorities of recipient communities. However, greater importance is often attached to Australia’s commercial and strategic interests, thus compromising the effectiveness of aid to combat poverty. For example, the 2010-2011 aid budget spends about $30 million over four years on controlling 'irregular' immigration and upgrading of detention facilities in Indonesia.
Learn more about Australia’s skewed aid objectives
AusAID currently sits within the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), which has a primary objective of advancing Australia’s national interest. For the aid program to maintain a clear focus on poverty alleviation and avoid being used as a vehicle to promote Australia’s strategic and commercial interests, AusAID needs to be established as a separate department with a Cabinet-level minister.
The impacts of climate change are felt most harshly by the poor worldwide. As the latest annual review of development effectiveness highlights “unless the global community adequately addresses the challenges of climate change, it will be more difficult to achieve and sustain the MDGs, and the impacts of climate change will undermine development gains already achieved.”[ii]
According to a 2010 World Bank report at least US$70 billion is needed annually to help developing countries adapt to the effects of climate change:
“the cost between 2010 and 2050 of adapting to an approximately 2oC warmer world by 2050 is in the range of $70 billion to $100 billion a year. This range is of the same order of magnitude as the foreign aid that developed countries now give developing countries each year, but it is still a very low percentage of the wealth of countries as measured by their GDP”. [iii]
Australia must pay its fair share of these costs. The Australian aid program, at about A$4.3 billion, is about 3 per cent of the total global ODA (of US$120 billion). If the government view is that this is a fair proportion of Australia's contribution to development aid, then the same should apply to climate aid. Thus Australian Government should commit to at least $2.1 billion per year in climate aid, commensurate with Australia's contribution to global ODA.
Currently the small amount of funding provided by Australia to address climate impacts is double-counted as climate aid to the UNCFCCC, and as ODA to the OECD. This practice violates the UNFCCC requirement that climate aid be additional to ODA.
Australian government must ensure that climate aid funding does not divert funds from other development priorities, and that it is aimed at primarily assisting the most vulnerable communities.
The Office of Development Effectiveness (ODE) is the government body responsible for monitoring the quality and evaluating the impact of Australian aid. However, the ODE is answerable to the Director of AusAID, rather than the parliament. This undermines the ODE’s ability to voice a genuine critique of Australia’s aid program. In addition, the majority of ODE reports have not been made publicly available[iv].
By contrast, the UK Government has committed to establishing an Independent Commission for Aid Impact which “will be totally independent from Government”, “will report directly to Parliament” and “will have completely separate decision-making powers, staff and location from the Department for International Development.” The Commissions’ “reports will be published on their website directly – with no interference from Government.”[v]
Independent monitoring and evaluation of Australia’s aid program is critical to ensuring quality and effectiveness. This includes public release of all evaluations and reports.
It is widely recognised that increased transparency and accountability of aid is crucial to improving the effectiveness of aid. AusAID is a signatory to the International Aid Transparency Initiative Accra Statement [vi], which commits it to:
Despite signing on to this statement, AusAID has fallen short of its commitments. As the Australian National Audit Office report (2009) highlights: “AusAID needs to develop better systems for capturing information on how Australian aid is delivered… At present, in the absence of published information, it is difficult for AusAID to be held to account for commitments to change the way Australian aid is delivered.”[vii]
AusAID must start translating its commitments into practice by providing up-to-date and detailed information about all aid programs, projects and initiatives to the public in a timely and accessible manner.
According to the DAC peer review of Australia’s aid program, about 20 to 25 per cent of Australian aid is delivered by commercial contractors[viii]. All aid contracts are covered by commercial-in-confidence agreements, making it difficult to know how millions of dollars in aid money is being spent. While AusAID publishes a list of aid contracts over $100,000 in value on its website, this provides only vague, one-sentence descriptions.
Check out more info about the commercialisation of Australia’s aid.
There is a need for greater transparency for commercial aid contracts. The Department of Finance and Administration has published a ‘Confidentiality Test’ in its Financial Management Guidelines,[ix] this provides some level of accountability into the proper use of commercial-in-confidence clauses in contracts (for example not allowing blanket inclusion of all information in a contract as commercial-in-confidence). All parts of commercial aid contracts that do not satisfy this ‘Confidentiality Test’ should be made publicly accessible over the Internet.
Technical Assistance (TA) refers to the funding of experts (usually from Australia) to provide advise and build skills and capacity in developing countries. TA accounts for 40-50% of the Australian foreign aid budget, twice the average of other OECD countries. Internationally, TA has been a source of considerable criticism due to its high cost and lack of effectiveness in developing capacity[x].
A review commissioned by Australia and Papua New Guinea (PNG) governments highlights the ineffectiveness of TA, noting that “[t]he emphasis on technical assistance for capacity building and the lack of much to show for it is at the heart of the political difficulties the Australian aid program to PNG is facing.” [xi]
AID/WATCH believes that TA should only be used when appropriately led by aid recipients, who must be able to define their own capacity development needs and identify what support, if any, is required from foreign advisers.
As a signatory to the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) and Accra Agenda for Action (2008) Australia has made commitments to better align development assistance with national development strategies and strengthen country ownership over aid delivery. However, Australia's performance in adhering to these aid effectiveness principles has been “below par”.
For example, only 38 per cent of Australian Technical Assistance was carried out “in a way that enables partner countries to exercise leadership over the assistance provided.” This falls short of the donor (DAC) average of 59 per cent[xii]. Similarly only 23 per cent of Australia’s aid is subject to partner countries’ procurement systems, which falls short of the donor (DAC) average of 44 per cent. [xiii]
In addition to recipient governments, local communities and civil society organisations should also have ownership over development initiatives. Those for whom development initiatives are aimed at helping must have a say in designing, implementing and evaluating such initiatives.
While aid can make a significant impact in terms of improving development outcomes for people, aid alone is not enough. There is a need for greater policy coherence across a broad range of sectors that affect developing countries, such as trade, investment, finance, migration, security and climate change. It is therefore important that these policies support – and not undermine – efforts to achieve internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals.
The Government needs to demonstrate how it is taking this ‘whole of government’ approach to promoting agreed development goals. It should do this, for instance, by instituting a precautionary criteria-based approach that requires policy-makers in these fields to establish how their decisions promote poverty alleviation, gender equity and sustainable development.
[i] AUSTRALIA’S INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - budget statement, Stephen Smith and Bob McMullen, 2010, p106, [Enphasis added]
[ii] Annual Review of Development Effectiveness 2009 – Improving basic services for the poor, AusAID Office of Development Effectiveness, p9
[iii] World Bank (2010) The Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change, A Synthesis Report, Final Consultation Draft (August), World Bank, Washington, p 10. (emphasis in original)
[iv] Australian National Audit Office (2009) AusAID's Management of the Expanding Australian Aid Program, ANAO Audit Report No. 15 2009-10, p.150.
[v] ‘New independent commission unveiled’, United Kingdom Department For International Development, media release 29 October 2010, < http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Media-Room/News-Stories/2010/New-independent-commission-unveiled/>
[vi] INTERNATIONAL AID TRANSPARENCY INITIATIVE ACCRA STATEMENT, 4th September 2008, < http://www.aidtransparency.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/iati-accra-statement-p1.pdf >
[vii] Australian National Audit Office (2009) AusAID's Management of the Expanding Australian Aid Program, ANAO Audit Report No. 15 2009-10, p.148.
[viii] Development Assistance Committee Peer Review of Australia, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2008/09, p. 64.< http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/29/42019772.pdf >
[ix] Guidance on Confidentiality in Procurement, Financial Management Guidelines 3, Department of Finance and Administration, p10 < http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/fmg-series/docs/FMG_3_Final_for_Publication.pdf >
[x] ActionAid International (2006) Real Aid 2: Making Technical Assistance Work, < http://www.actionaid.org/assets/pdf/Real%20Aid%202%20small%20pdf%20version%20for%20emailing.pdf > and Duxfield, F. & Wheen, K (2007). Fighting Poverty or Fantasy Figures: The Reality of Australian Aid, AID/WATCH, Sydney
[xi] Review of the PNG-Australia Development Cooperation Treaty (1999), 19 April 2010, p 26. http://www.ausaid.gov.au/publications/pdf/PNGAustralianAidReview.pd
[xii] Australian National Audit Office (2009) AusAID's Management of the Expanding Australian Aid Program, ANAO Audit Report No. 15 2009-10, p.90
[xiii] Annual Review of Development Effectiveness 2009 – Improving basic services for the poor, AusAID Office of Development Effectiveness, p42
1 - Remove ‘National Interest’ from the objective of Australia’s aid program.[1]
2 - Avoid the securitsation of aid.
Funds for placing Australian security forces overseas should not be considered as aid funding as this is inherently linked to Australia’s own national security
3 - Reduce the proportion of Technical Assistance in the AusAID budget to at least the OECD average; and ensure that any Technical Assistance funded is carried out in partnership with recipient governments.
Currently only 38% of Australian Technical Assistance is carried out in partnership, as opposed to the OECD average of 59% of aid conducted in government partnership1 TA should only be used when appropriately led by aid recipients who must be able to define their own capacity development needs and identify what support, if any, is required from foreign advisors.
4 - Create an independent body to monitor aid effectiveness and accountability.
This could be achieved by transforming the existing Office of Development Effectiveness into a genuinely independent body which makes all its reports public. All ODE reports include a detailed breakdown of expenditures.
Currently the budget shows a $330 million item with only a sentence of explanation to the Australian public.
5 - Reduce the amount of aid channelled through private corporations.
6 - Improve the transparency of commercial aid contracts.
Currently commercial-in-confidence contracts prevent transparency on AusAID contracts; million dollar contracts are awarded with only a few general words explaining to the public what the money is used for. Budgets should be broken down and evaluation reports should be made public.
7 - Increase the proportion of aid channelled through NGOs.
At present less than 10% of the value of aid contracts are administered through NGO’s
8 - Prioritise aid programs that help grassroots communities become eco-sufficient and culturally autonomous.
9 - Uphold Australia’s commitment made in the Kyoto Agreement that funds on climate change will not come out of existing aid commitments for MDGs.
Under the 1995 Berlin Mandate, which Australia signed at the time, and implemented under the later 1997 Kyoto Agreement, finally signed by Australia in 2007, the UNFCCC agreed that funding for joint implementation of climate mitigation would be additional to ‘current official development assistance (ODA) flows’ [2]
10 - Cease artificially inflating the aid budget.
For example, by including funding for debt cancellation, processing of asylum seekers, scholarship schemes, national security concerns and government departments. These should be funded in addition to the Australian aid budget.
11 - Fund education for public understanding of the implications and impacts of aid.
Last updated 14 November 2010 Next Page
[1] AusAID's Management of the Expanding Australian Aid Program, The Auditor-General Ian Mc-Phee, Audit Report No.15 2009–10 - Performance Audit, 2010
[2] UNFCCC (1995) Report of the Conference of the Parties on its First Session, held at Berlin from 28 March to 7 April 1995, Decision 5/CP1; see also Friends of the Earth Australia (2009) Stronger communities greener growth: environment and climate change strategy for Australian development assistance, Submission to AusAID, FoEA, Melbourne.
Can you help with:
Email us at MakeAidFair [at] aidwatch [dot] org [dot] au or use our contact form and we’ll respond with how you can join the campaign
Last updated 12 November 2010