I acknowledge that it is irresponsible to increase a budget so substantially without proper capacity to spend it appropriately, however, that’s where transparent, remarkably effective, proven multi-lateral organisations can play an important role. For example, we need to contribute more to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria which is able to leverage whatever we contribute to benefit the Asia-Pacific region specifically with this region benefitting disproportionately from Global Fund funds over the next few years. I fear that it’ll take the spread of multi-drug resistant TB and malaria to Australia, which will waste millions, to properly address it in our closest neighbouring countries/popular Australian holiday destinations. By then it may well be too late to use current technology and we will be cursing our missed opportunity to get control of these diseases. Diseases will not be contained in a globalised society, we need to look beyond our borders to protect our own citizens (if the human decency argument doesn’t work). Not to mention the link between extremism, political unrest and poverty – compelling stuff. Essentially it is in our interest to act in this space as much or more as with armed forces, prevention rather than a Band-Aid.
Further, our closest neighbours are some of the furthest from reaching the MDG targets. ‘Progress’ towards the MDG targets isn’t good enough. All could have been achieved had the proper resources been contributed, as was acknowledged at the outset of the MDGs. Any not achieved is causing unnecessary death and suffering in our fellow human beings and that is on us – we could have prevented it and we could be preventing more with this budget.

The UK’s economy is in a far worse position than Australia’s economy. Yet the UK has announced the intention to reach 0.7 per cent of GNI this year and also legally insulated their aid budget last year. Looking at aggregate figures from other OECD countries, which were already giving far more than Australia is a dishonest distortion of reality. Selectively reporting favourable statistics hides the ‘real picture’. Don’t forget that on latest figures we are still 13th out of 23 OECD countries in percentage of GNI we contribute – and while having arguably the strongest economy.

I vote entirely based on which government I feel will produce the most favourable ODA policies as I know I will have a relatively luxurious life regardless of who is in government here. This selfish and short sighted policy, and missed opportunity, might well come back to bite us when we have to re-open tuberculosis hospitals across Australia.

No they weren’t Bob. The boy I’m name after, my uncle John Tognolini, was born in either 1900 or 1901. That puts his age at either 15, 16 or 17. He was killed in action on 25-4-18 at Villers Bretonneux. The army had his age at 24. Like most boys he lied about his age and the army turned a blind eye. All armies had boy soldiers but for some reason Australia had the highest amount of them.

He won the Military Medal at Passchendaele six months before hand. His citation reads:

“At Broodseinde during the period 26/27th October 1917 No 3648 Pte John Tognolini did excellent work on the morning of the 26th October. He was one of a party of eight carrying two stretcher cases to the Regimental Aid Post when a shell burst and severely wounded three of the party. Although wounded himself he continued with his work and made two trips back to get the wounded they had left on the way. He then returned to line and on the morning of the 27th October when several men were wounded by shell fire and all the stretchers in use. He dressed one man and carried him on his back to the R.A.P. All this work was under very heavy shell fire.

He set a fine example of coolness and courage to the men of his company. Pte Tognolini has on many occasions shown great courage and devotion to duty.

John Tognolini

Wellington, New South Wales

Well done Bob.

Eliot

Sent from my iPhone

As we live, engage in our region, we are nevertheless engaged in a global region. For instance, we trade with China, Indonesia, Japan, India, South Korea etc and these great respected nations trade to the world. By definition, we trade with nations around the world. I believe that it is in this context, the ‘White Paper’ should also invite ideas and comment from European, Canadian, USA, South American respected Pacific-rim leading economies. Take European nations like Germany, France, UK and The Netherlands they are also great Asian Investors – manufacturers and so on. I fully accept that the Asian ‘Indian-Pacific-Rim’ region is specifically important to us, but we must surely include our immediate ‘family’ neighbour, New Zealand. We are reportedly rated the twelfth largest global trading economy. The Governments White Paper aims for a vision, a strategy ten years out into the future, but I know, ‘future thinking’ is a complex process based upon multiplying variables, seeking to assess risks and outcomes. For example, in two years time from now, we will be twelve years into the future, so how could our current Australian policy-makers respond to people movement as they are confronted with risky-impacts caused by caused by climate Change, increasing demographic population of people, the impact on habitat, the availability of potable water-food production-distribution and so on? Some Australian citizens cannot even cope with people movement today.
Is the inquiry to narrow? I think it is.

Ralf