 Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Anthony Bubolo. I'm the Deputy Director and Research Director here at the Lowe Institute. Welcome to this special address as a part of the Lowe lecture series by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development, the Honourable Tanya Plibersek MP. One of the missions of the Lowe Institute is to deepen the public discussion of international affairs and we do that in a number of ways. One important way is by hosting speeches by leaders across the political spectrum. In the last year the Lowe Institute has hosted speeches by the Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, by the Leader of the Opposition Bill Shorten and the Leader of the Greens Senator Richard Di Natale and we are hoping to host the Minister for Foreign Affairs in coming weeks and today of course we are welcoming the Deputy Opposition Leader and the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs. It's a little tough being a foreign policy wonk in an election campaign. Rarely do elections turn on foreign policy issues and it's not often that they are at the centre of election debates and discussion. We feel a little bit lonely in election campaigns. It's a shame of course because the line between international and domestic issues is increasingly blurred. International issues like trade, terrorism, climate change to name just a few impact directly on the lives of ordinary Australians and while tackling those issues is usually beyond the gift of any one state even the world's most powerful states it's still important to hear from our leaders about the way they think Australia should help tackle global challenges to our security while also seizing international opportunities to enhance our prosperity. Tanya Plibersek was previously the Minister for Health. Her other ministerial appointments have included Minister for Medical Research, Minister for Social Inclusion, Minister for Human Services, Minister for the Status of Women and Minister for Housing. She was elected to federal parliament as the member for Sydney in 1998. I also note from Tanya's bio that she grew up in the southern shire of Sydney the daughter of migrants from Slovenia. Tanya my parents are of Croatian heritage so we might say today's address is the low Institute's Balkan moment. Ladies and gentlemen please join me in welcoming Tanya Plibersek. Thank you Anthony for that kind welcome. I'd like to start by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land that we're meeting on today and pay my respects to their elders past and present. It is such a pleasure to be here with so many friends. Thank you so much for coming on what looks to be quite a rainy and miserable day. The US Alliance, our region, global engagement. Most mainstream thinking in this country accepts these as the main tenets of Australian foreign policy. Parties, experts and great institutions such as this one may differ over emphasis and approach but there's broad agreement on the component parts and their central importance. Perhaps this is why foreign policy often plays a marginal roles in election campaigns. I'm sorry you feel unloved Anthony I'll try and show you a bit of love today. Elections are designed to amplify difference but foreign policy is most often about continuity and seeking common ground and I think that's proper. Campaigns are built on concentrated points of contrast. Yet even if foreign policy doesn't shift a single vote in a single seat at this election, Australia's place in the world, our future in our region and our responsibilities as a good international citizen deserve to be part of our national conversation because there are differences between Labor and the Liberals and Labor and the Greens and those differences matter. The key difference between the two major political parties, the progressive and conservative forces in foreign policy traditions, is foundational. Labor believes that good international citizenship is a critical driver to achieving a secure and prosperous Australia. For as Gareth Evans observed, good international citizenship is no more and no less than the pursuit of enlightened self-interest. Good international citizenship aligns with enduring Labor values of solidarity, fairness, equality, justice and inclusion. We believe strongly that our national security and prosperity improve with greater international security and prosperity. By acting as a good international citizen, by enhancing the rules-based international order and by promoting respect for universal human rights, we are working for long-term peace and prosperity for Australian people. As we build Australia's international reputation, we also build economic and strategic advantage. It's in this area of difference that Labor has crafted its proud foreign policy tradition. A century's passed since the First World War, since Australia became in Banjo-Patterson's words to know what nations know and feel what nations feel. Yet it took a second deadlier, more devastating conflict for the world to learn that total war could only end in total destruction. The First World War energised efforts to create a system to regulate interstate behaviour, but it took the Second World War and 60 million dead to make the need for such a system undeniable. A century after Australians died in their thousands in the mud of the Western Front, we no longer see war as a grand adventure, nor an inevitable outcome of competing interests. For all its imperfections, the international system of institutions, rules and norms established since the Second World War continue to influence the behaviour of states, even powerful ones. But just as the dawn of the 20th century unleashed massive social, economic and technological change across Europe and North America, that transformation is being repeated at a greater speed and on a greater scale in our own region, the Indo-Pacific. With this comes unparalleled opportunities for Australia and significant challenges too. Not just a checklist to be worked through one at a time. As Alan Gingel has said, the challenges we face are more complicated, more interrelated and more internationalised. Take the impacts of climate, of climate change, of conflict, of people movement driven by poverty and inequality, of health crises and of course terrorism. All threats to our security. The decisions that we make in this decade and the actions we take as a global community are writing the history of this era and defining the years ahead. We won't be wealthier or safer if we only seek safety and wealth inside the walls of a fortress we build for ourselves. Achieving a prosperous and secure future for our nation demands that we look beyond our borders. This has always been the labour way. A foreign policy tradition of Australia as an enthusiastic participant in establishing international frameworks. The laws, norms and international institutions that govern international behaviour. Of course the names, places and stories are familiar to all of you. San Francisco in 1945, Doc Everett drafting the Charter of the United Nations, advocating for his vision of a UN, a place where every nation had an empowered voice, not just the great powers. Ben Chifley's decision to support the birth of an Indonesian republic rather than the revival of a Dutch colony. Whitlam as opposition leader, leaving footsteps in China for the United States to follow. And as Prime Minister inspiring a national change of consciousness in the way that Australia looked at the world and our place within it. Gough helped Australia move from the narrow to the inclusive, from insularity to openness. Soon after being sworn in he said that our thinking is towards an Australia which will enjoy a growing standard as a distinctive, tolerant, cooperative and well regarded nation, not only in the Asian Pacific region but in the world at large. This sense of national self and Gough's staunch belief in the international law established Australia as an authoritative and independent voice on the world stage. Whitlam established the Australian Development Assistance Agency and increased Australia's development assistance. A commitment that continued was continued by successive Labor governments. Of course, the Abbott opposition went into the 2013 election saying that they too were committed to an aid funding target of 0.5% of gross national income but instead the aid program has subsequently been gutted and is now the weakest in Australian history. Within two months of taking government, Whitlam ratified the non-proliferation treaty, something previous governments had refused to do. In fact, it was part of a flurry of ratification of international treaties and support for conventions. Labor today remains committed to strengthening non-proliferation regimes and pursuing responsible nuclear disarmament. Our disarmament efforts have been described by the coalition as utopian. But we believe, as President Obama said in Hiroshima, that we need a moral revolution on nuclear weapons. We also know that we have been successful in the past. The Hawke government established the Australia Group, the Keating government launched the Canberra Commission, the Rudd government established, together with Japan, the International Commission on Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament. This is part of our proud and progressive tradition. Australia as an engaged member of the global community of nations. During Australia's previous term on the Security Council in 8586, Foreign Minister Bill Hayden and our UN Ambassador Richard Wilcott, who's with us here today, drove Council action on apartheid, furthering foreign policy priority that Australia pursued over successive governments. Bob Hawke and Gareth Evans initiated the APEC forum and the economic cooperation across the Pacific Rim that it has delivered. Gareth spearheaded the Cambodian peace process, returning normality to a people who were devastated by genocidal civil war and bringing far greater stability to the region. Prime Minister Paul Keating made APEC a leaders forum and urged Australia to look for its security in Asia and not from Asia. Foreign Minister Stephen Smith worked to have the United States included in the East Asia Summit expanding US engagement in our region. Bob Carbrough to a successful conclusion, our campaign for a seat on the Security Council. Hopefully it's now uncontroversial that Labor Security Council bid was in the national interest. An accepted piece of bipartisan wisdom that Australia can show leadership at a global level. And we are proud of course of the work of Prime Minister Julia Gillard in establishing regular and formal leader level dialogues between China and Australia, a foreign policy achievement which will only grow in importance over time. Because there is no more important foreign policy consideration for Australia today than the rise of China as a prosperous, peaceful and stable world power. The emergence of China as both a regional and global superpower represents tremendous opportunities and benefits for our nation. We must effectively and independently engage with China with our other Asian partners too. But this commitment to the region and to further developing our relationships with its major actors does not mean that our commitment to our alliance with the US is in any way diminished. Greens leader Richard De Natale rejected Australia's alliance with the US on this very stage describing it as stifling. It's an odd choice of word seemingly designed to create a headline without really advancing an argument. And drawn from a sense of impotence that to my mind does not exist in the frank, honest friendship at the core of the US alliance. I do however value the opportunity it gives me to reiterate the value that Labor places on the US alliance and the strategic and economic benefit that it has long delivered. Not just for Australia but for our region too. Our ability to be positive and assertive in our engagement in the region is bolstered by the confidence and security provided by our alliance with the United States. The Greens want to as the Greens want Australia to shun the world's leading democracy but don't really know where we should go. It's a pattern common to their foreign policy, the search for righteous indignation and the embrace of false binaries. The Greens also oppose the current military campaign against Daesh in the Middle East without really providing any credible alternative to prevent that organization murdering, raping and enslaving men, women and children and urging attacks in Australia. Australia under Labor will continue to be a reliable ally to the United States but we will disagree with our ally when it is in our interests to do so. It's also in the global interest that we should be independent within the alliance. As Kim Beasley said we want alliance not compliance. We are more valuable as an ally if we act confidently and independently within the alliance. We should have disagreed in 2003 as the decision to invade and occupy Iraq was such a terrible mistake with such long trailing consequences. Our value as an ally increases when we are prepared to speak up to question, analyze and act thoughtfully. While acknowledging the conspicuous flaws in the current system Labor supports the United Nations and other multilateral institutions as key instruments in our foreign policy too because some of the most pressing and serious challenges facing us can never be solved unilaterally even bilaterally perhaps even regionally. They require truly global action. The international system provides a platform from which we can project our voice and our national interests well beyond the comparative size of our economy and our armed forces. Under Labor we secured a spot in the Security Council for the first time in a generation. You will remember that the Liberals sneered at us when we embarked on our bid threatening to cancel it during the 2010 election and yet as John Langmore has pointed out Australia realized much during its term on Syria on MH17 on small arms on human rights in North Korea. We should not forget nor minimize the contribution the United Nations and its associated organisations have made to the modern world. Because of the United Nations smaller states have an international voice and countries like Australia can demonstrate global leadership. Labor recognises the interdependence of nations the interdependence of global opportunities and global challenges. Successful Australian interaction with the countries of the Indo-Pacific our third pillar will be achieved by meaningful engagement in the region grounded in strong bilateral relationships and real commitment to multilateral processes and rules-based norms. A shortened Labor government would promote cooperative and mutually beneficial relationships with our key regional partners. At the same time we will pursue closer engagement with key regional institutions including ASEAN, the East Asia Summit and through the APEC meetings. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd emphasised the need for strong and effective regional institutional arrangements and indeed Kevin's still been doing a great deal of work in his retirement on this issue to account for the rebalancing of global economic power currently underway ensuring that these institutions steer the region toward peace security and prosperity. Australia must be part of shaping new institutions such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. We should have been a founding member not a hesitant last-minute participant. The London G20 conference lessened the impact of the global financial crisis and a Labor government played a key role in building up this institution reflecting the changing economic relationships since the Second World War the legitimate aspirations that a number of countries had to be at the decision-making table when it came to managing the effects of the global financial crisis. The Gillard government launched the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper to ensure that Australia's engagement with Asia was promoted at every opportunity methodically consistently and over the long term. We established a whole-of-government approach building people-to-people links that would support a genuine place for Australia within Asia. The electronic book burning that wiped the Asian Century White Paper from departmental history was petty, short-sighted and typical of a small-minded approach in so many of the big questions. A Labor government will revive and redouble our efforts to build Australia's relationship with Asia through exchange and cooperation across every sector of the economy and our community. Thriving in the Asian Century, seizing the economic opportunities and managing the security challenges requires an understanding of the history, cultures, societies and languages of the nations to our north. The language component of this literacy is currently lagging with more Australian school students studying Indonesian in 1972 than do so today. This needs to change as the capacity for Australians to build deeper ties with Asia will only be enhanced by an increase in proficiency of Asian languages and the better cultural understanding that comes with learning a language. That's why a shorter Labor government will establish an Asian Century Teaching Scholarship program which will enable 100 qualified Australian language teachers each year to complete language immersion programs in targeted Asian countries with a priority on cementing and Asian language proficiency. I began this speech by looking back at the development of the international system in which we now work. Looking forward the international centre of global economic activity will continue to track towards our region. The growing economic power of our Asian neighbours is reflected in their expanding diplomatic influence and foreign policy aspirations. These nations will test Australia's economic influence as well as our diplomatic influence both regionally and globally. Passing this test demands more of our national energy and imagination. We cannot hope to play the role of quiet observer in the shifts in power occurring on our doorstep. We will not prosper in the Asian century by retreating into the Anglosphere any more than we will enhance our reputation in the region by seeking to shirk our obligations as a prosperous nation or opting to pass by on the other side of the road. Both major parties often say that the first responsibility of a government is to ensure the security and prosperity of its citizens. In the same breath we should state clearly that Asia's peaceful and prosperous rise is critical to us meeting this responsibility and that demands that Australia be a consequential and confident actor in our region and in the international system more broadly. A country that can influence global and regional institutions and can shape the Asian strategic environment, pursuing creative diplomacy that will ensure that our values and interests are protected for the long term. The rules-based international order has brought so much benefit to our country and we should act to maintain and support that system. We cannot expect other nations to adhere to a system we do not ourselves uphold. On whaling, on the settlement of international trade and maritime disputes, on French nuclear testing in the Pacific we insisted others play by the rules. On the overlapping maritime claims in the South China Sea we urge all parties to abide by both the terms and the spirit of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Australia has a good record of acting in defence of this system but not the flawless one. Australia's key role in securing independence for East Timor was a proud moment for our nation but we have allowed the maritime boundary dispute to poison relations and Labor will change this. I announced earlier this year that a shortened Labor government will intensify efforts to conclude good faith negotiations with Timor-les to settle the maritime boundaries between our two countries. If I am Foreign Minister after July 2nd I intend to travel to Timor-les before the end of August to launch negotiations. If we are not successful in negotiating a settlement with our neighbour we are prepared to submit ourselves to international adjudication or arbitration. It's in the national interest of both countries that we do so and other nations collectively support the international the institutional arrangements that will assist us. It's also in our national interest to proactively combat climate change both domestically and internationally. Domestically Labor would adopt ambitious and achievable targets and measures that set a common-sense pathway to a low pollution economy. Far from the world of global summer tree climate change is an existential threat to some of our neighbours in the Pacific. I saw this first hand when Bill Shorten, Richard Molls and I visited PNG the Marshall Islands and Kiribati last year. We should be amplifying the voice of our Pacific Island neighbours as several of their leaders have asked us to do ensuring that the world understands the plight facing these low-lying small island nation states. Both our immigration minister and our foreign minister have publicly joked about this existential threat posed to some Pacific countries. We are currently undergoing engagement with our Pacific Island neighbours on climate change but also on broader questions of security and economic development and when we withdraw from our near region others may take our place. Australia has a proud history of engaging with our Pacific Island neighbours through Pacific patrol boats, through institutions strengthening education exchange, technical assistance and through Ramsey but I fear that this is being lost through aid cuts and through indifference and indeed through our own bureaucracy which undervalues the strategic importance of our Pacific neighbourhood. We should be looking at the next steps in cooperation particularly regarding climate change adaptation. We should also be exploring with our friends in the Pacific ways to prepare for a future where some parts of their countries become uninhabitable. Some countries are already making their own contingency plans and we should be supporting them. More than six decades ago a great Labor Prime Minister Ben Chifley defined the Labor mission in a phrase that no one has been able to better. He spoke of course of the light on the hill a moral duty to work for the betterment of mankind not only here but anywhere we may give a helping hand. This duty was expressed in our recent aid announcement. Labor supports a strong aid program because as a good global citizen Australia has a duty to help reduce poverty and inequality and respond effectively to humanitarian crises. Labor supports a strong aid program because it helps keep Australia safe by working to tackle serious diseases and violence in our region and across the world. Labor supports a strong aid program because it benefits Australia's economy when countries go from being aid recipients to trading partners. I believe that there's much more that Australian ideas and values can offer in shaping a better world. Australia can have a more creative and more confident presence on the world stage. The Labor Party stands apart from any other party left or right with its coherent articulation of a conceptual framework behind our foreign policy. The Labor Party stands apart from any other party with a clear vision at the core of our foreign policy. We believe in being good international citizens because it's our moral duty but also because it serves our long-term national interest better. Good international citizenship is a principle worth emphasizing. It's a priority that we're proud to advocate. It's the idea at the heart of our plans for the future of Australia and our place in the world here and anywhere where we may give a helping hand. Thank you. Thank you Tanya for that very comprehensive and thoroughgoing speech. That always means too long when people say it like that. No, no. You've given us lots of foreign policy wonks, lots of chew on so it's great. The deputy leader of the opposition has very kindly agreed to take some questions as is normally the case here at the Low Institute. I'll take the chair's privilege and you know someone's about to introduce us so I'll do it early. The Trump question. Oh good. If Donald Trump does become the US president how would a future Labor government manage what's likely to be, what many people expect to be, a very unpredictable presidency given what you said about the importance of the US alliance? Well of course it is a very important relationship and it's a very long-standing relationship and I don't have any doubt that should Mr Trump become president that the relationship between our two nations will continue to prosper. I guess it's probably worth remembering that John Howard was very critical of a young Barack Obama in the period before he became president and still managed Australia and the United States of course had a not just a close relationship but an even closer relationship during the Obama presidency with the the visit from President Obama and the announcement that he made about American foreign policy in our region at that time so I don't doubt that there'll be any, I don't for a minute think there'd be any diminution of the relationship between us. I think it is important to have a look at some of the things that Mr Trump has said about our region so that we are able to deal with those those issues if they arise though. Thank you. I'll now take questions. Please wait for the microphone and please keep it to a question rather than a comment so we can get through as many questions as possible down here in the front. Mr Ivanish, can I work for the Russian emergency task? My question is about my country. In case of Labor victory in July the second do you envision that Labor government would pursue different course in relations between Canberra and Moscow or you envision that the general political approach will be basically the same? Well I mean the general political approach is that we have long had a good relationship with Russia. There has been a period of tension with the downing of a passenger aircraft which I think everybody in Australian public life would be very critical of and concerned about but the relationship more generally is I think a good relationship. Over here. Thank you very much for a very progressive foreign policy that you've outlined. Can I just bring two things together you mentioned? You talk about engagement with the Pacific and with our Asian neighbors and also nuclear weapons and you talked about Labor's proud history in that area. Sorry I didn't introduce myself. My name is Darrell Cornu from the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. So just looking at nuclear weapons will a future Labor government what will it do to pursue being a better international citizen in that area? Will it for instance join the 127 countries that have signed the Humanitarian Pledge as all of our immediate Asian and Pacific neighbors? Will it implement the party platform and support a global treaty banning nuclear weapons? Thank you. Well I think you've kind of in to a degree answered the question within by asking the question. Both our platform and our history tell you about Labor's approach to nuclear non-proliferation. We've got a very strong support for all practical measures towards nuclear non-proliferation. What about the back there? Hello, I'm Mr Takagawa. I'm a General of Japan. We are very happy from the Japanese perspective that this sort of growing sort of strong partnership between our two countries which is now called a special strategic partnership. So I'd like to have your comment on how you're going to proceed in your development of relations with Japan. And another question is a maritime security which is a very important concern for all of us here. So would you be specific about what you're going to do? Thank you. Well I think the relationship between Australia and Japan is a long-standing and important one. We are always pleased to welcome closer cooperation, economic and security cooperation with Japan. We are a little disappointed that the the issue of the submarine tendering seem to run off course a little. And we see it as very important that we continue to work cooperatively with Japan and with other countries in our in our region to make sure that our maritime environment in particular remains secure, that there is freedom of navigation and so on. Right at the back. How should Australia respond to China's expansionary activities in the South China Sea? I wasn't predicting that one. I'm a participant in this in this policy making area, not a not a commentator, not a not an academic. And so I note that the Lowy Interpreter has a fierce debate going on at the moment with different articles about whether we should emphasise diplomatic means, whether we should emphasise freedom of navigation movements and so on. I'm not going to get involved in that debate. We have said from the beginning that Australia has no view on the competing territorial claims in the South China Sea that we invert we urge all of the parties to come to a negotiated settlement that takes account of international laws and norms that if the dispute or when the dispute currently being evaluated between the Philippines and China is concluded that all parties should abide by the decision that's made that's how that's been our position consistently. Can I draw you out on that a little? It's often said that Australia has a China choice between our economic relationship with China and our strategic relationship with the United States. I would argue that we in fact we have another choice and that's between the China we hope for and the China we fear. The China we hope for, the kind of the economic miracle, a globally engaged responsible China and the China we fear a China that is militarily empowered a bit more assertive, a bit more aggressive. Are you worried that perhaps in recent years we're starting to see a bit more of the China that we fear? I think that it is absolutely not in Australia's interest to be presented with the kind of choices that you're suggesting and I've said that very early on with the the first China choice that you were describing in relation to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. I think that was presented to us as being a choice between supporting our traditional ally and signing on to a much needed new source of infrastructure funding for our region and we don't agree that that was a choice. I also, in the second choice that you're presenting me with, you're asking me to engage in a kind of hypothetical evaluation about what might happen in the future and that's that's not my job, it wouldn't be my job as foreign minister and it's not my job as shadow foreign minister to talk in hypotheticals that way. I can tell you what our principles are. I can tell you that our principles are to use our diplomatic influence to to use our relationships to ensure that what is in the interests of us all that China grows in prosperity in a way that supports a peaceful and prosperous region that will do everything we can to make sure that that happens. Still here. Chris Amo, World Citizens Association. Thank you for your talk, I liked what I heard I must say. I'd like to ask you if you have any ideas how we might begin the process towards an eventual goal of a global parliament and in particular what do you think of the campaign for a united nation's parliamentary assembly? I don't have a goal of a world parliament so I'm not going to talk about the potential steps because it's not my goal. I think that the United Nations the United Nations certainly needs reforms. I think that a number of the post-World War II institutions, large international institutions need reform because they should take account of the way the world has changed in more than 50 years. But I think that we can balance the continued need for increasing cooperation in an increasingly interrelated world with still being able to retain the ability to make our own decisions as a sovereign nation state. And I'll give you an example of when I was health minister we did plain packaging of tobacco and so I had to put up when I was health minister with finding tens of millions of dollars to pay for legal defences against unfair trade related legal cases against Australia for taking action that I think was absolutely 100% in our national interest and in the interests of our citizens. I'm not going to spend time thinking of ways that we can be further integrated in a world, you know, you in parliament that in the way that you're describing I'm my interests are much more in our immediate relationships and our immediate responsibilities. Jennifer here. Thank you. Antonizwe University of New South Wales. Thanks very much for that informative overview. I'd like to just ask a little bit about the particular areas of development assistance and foreign aid. You've mentioned the importance of Australia being engaged and committed within the region. Can you say something about what damage is done when aid is cut suddenly as has happened? UN agencies have their funding reduced by something like 40% almost overnight. Africa funding gets reduced by 70% so those sort of very quick changes how's that perceived and also whether you could say something about whether Labor would continue to support sort of aid for trade or orientation which we have at present? So I think the very fast cuts to the Australian aid budget came so quickly in succession three of them so there was an initial cut in the first mid-year economic and fiscal outlook immediately after 2013 budget several hundreds of millions of dollars then the first sorry after the election then in the first budget several billions of dollars and then the next mid-year update several billions of more dollars cut from the aid budget in the 2014 budget about 20% of all cuts in the 2014 budget came from the aid budget which of course is a tiny fraction of the Australian budget overall it's about 1% of the Australian budget overall. So it is the largest area of government cut it means that we've gone from being almost at 0.5% of GNI our long-term stated target in fact a target that we reached under Goff Whitlam but haven't achieved since. We almost got there in government we went from an aid budget of $2.9 billion to about $5.6 billion during the time of the last Labor government we almost doubled the aid budget and it's actually one of the great tragedies of this period of government in in my view that we have so deeply cut the aid budget again we're back down now at about 0.23% that means we spend 23 cents in every $100 helping the world's poorest people. Many Australians think we spend a lot more than that if you do surveys of what people think we spend on the aid budget they say 10% or 14% something of our federal budget of course it's a fraction of that. The effect of that has been devastating it's been absolutely devastating it's been devastating on our relationships it's been devastating on the people who will not benefit because Australian aid dollars have been withdrawn and the practical impact of that is in every area of our aid program formally it's in child and maternal health it's in institution building it's in it's in you know climate change adaptation and mitigation it's in education it's in every area of our aid program and for me I think some of the greatest tragedies are the small but really effective programs that have just lost funding and one example is the Seats for Life program that I saw in in East Timor where Australian agricultural scientists agronomists and others have really helped local farmers to increase their crop yields sometimes about 40% or more that's really important in a country where 40% of children are still malnourished it's a it's a really bad thing when we when we see sound participation in programs like that it has serious long-term effects including the the loss of expertise um and the loss of relationships um what can I tell you about the effect of it the effect I don't I don't know if there's uh if there's another way of saying it more clearly it is devastating it has very serious real life consequences for people who will no longer receive Australian assistance and it has really serious real life consequences for our relations with our neighbours including neighbours who are told in my hearing by the foreign minister that there would not be aid cuts to the pacific you mentioned uh in your answer there that that there are a lot of Australians who thought who think we spend more on aid than we actually do um in our own polling we've we've seen where we've asked Australians about the different arms of Australia's international engagement and you know the defence force and the foreign service kind of consistently rank in terms of people's perception of importance above our aid agency do you think there's a lot more that government should do in terms of building constituency or building an awareness amongst Australians themselves about what their aid money does and and how important it is well look I think that there's a strong and persuasive moral case for aid and I don't think we should apologise for saying that we are a wealthy country by international standards and we should do our fair share and at the moment there are countries that have suffered a great deal more during the global financial crisis than Australia did that are doing much more than Australia did that are increasing their contribution as we are decreasing ours but aside from the moral case from aid there's actually a pretty good enlightened self-interest case for aid as well including in the area of trade for example if you look at countries like Thailand and Malaysia which were significant beneficiaries of Australian aid once upon a time they're now our eighth and ninth largest trading partners I mean there are plenty of examples where we have helped countries for a period of time they have lifted themselves out of poverty and into middle income or prosperity and and the benefit for us comes over time in in the trade relationship you asked about aid for trade earlier that's what aid for trade should be it should be about lifting countries out of poverty so they can become genuine trading partners it shouldn't be a way of siphoning our aid funding into Australian companies now I make no criticism of the individual company involved but when we finally responded to the Ebola crisis the Australian company that won the contract for that had a price per patient that they were treating that was about eight times the medicines on frontier price per patient so that's not that's not the fault of the company I'm not making criticism of the company I'm making a criticism of an approach that prioritizes aid for trade over the most sensible investment of our aid dollars thank you for your address Thomas Simon from University of Sydney I just wanted to follow up on the question from Anthony my colleague at UNSW regarding the aid budget and what kind of commitment the Labor government would do or the Labor Party would do if in government in terms of reinstalling the kind of aid budget we had under previous recent government and also how it would look at the geographic allocation the current government look at the performance of its aid allocation but still cutting to countries that are actually performing very well while it's increasing or keeping the same in countries where they're actually underperforming so I'm interested on your view about the the aid budget and also how you would allocate geographically okay thanks so we've already made a number of announcements about the aid budget which sees us spending about $800 million over the next four years more than the government. $450 million over three years goes to the UNHCR because we think that the one of the greatest challenges of our time is the unprecedented movement of people driven by conflict and poverty around the world and we we believe that the UNHCR is under resourced to do what is truly you know and people keep saying more people than since the Second World War in fact it is more more people than we've ever seen before on the move and we think that the UNHCR needs to be better resourced to properly look after people who in some cases will be absent from their homelands for a long time if not forever but not permanently settled elsewhere will be in temporary settlement sometimes for years or even potentially generations so that's one substantial increase in our aid funding and the second substantial increase is in partnership with non-government organisations we've made an announcement of $40 million additional funding each year for our partnership with NGOs we think that NGOs quite often because they're often using largely vocal workforces and leveraging non-government funding as well are able to substantially do a lot with with the small amount of funding that we give them and we've also said that we will stop the aid cut between this year and next year a $224 million projected drop which goes to the question of programs that have to be cut from one year to the next the when it comes to the geographical distribution of aid I'm not going to go region by region at the moment but I'll give you two principles the first is we do have a particular responsibility to our near neighbours where Australia is seen as a prosperous and powerful neighbour and there are there are natural responsibilities that come with proximity that of course we consider but if you if you look at the pattern of aid funding cuts in this massive program of cuts the cuts have been particularly bad in in sub-Saharan Africa North North Africa and the Middle East particularly harsh cuts there and I I can't really in conscience accept that we have no responsibility no responsibility there it's plain that in a number of countries former colonial powers European nations more generally have a more substantial aid program than we will can or would ever have but that doesn't mean that we can't still support efforts in some of the poorest nations on earth Alex thank you Ms. Clippersake and on behalf of the women in foreign policy in the room it's just fantastic to have both a female shadowed foreign minister and a female minister so welcome one question from the women which is not to do with gender and that's to do with a long line of work that we've been doing here at the Institute on Australia's international representation and our diplomatic network around the world as you know I think Australia is quite underdone in our network we're falling below the OECD and the G20 average with the number of posts we have around the world and I was wondering what what your view on that was and what Labor would do about Australia's diplomatic network yeah this I think comes up periodically I think there's plenty of evidence to say that we are underdone but I'm not going to to make announcements today about where we would where we would boost our presence and it was the same criticism that the the now government that then opposition made when they were in opposition last time around and I'm not sure that it's particularly productive from opposition to start talking about where we might increase our effort but I'd certainly acknowledge what you're saying about compared with countries our size even smaller countries seem to have a larger footprint than we do ladies and gentlemen we take great pride at the Institute in finishing on time right it's it's been wonderful to have you it was a comprehensive speech and by that I don't mean overly long it was comprehensive in that it gives us foreign policy wants a lot lots to chew on and we will uh over coming days on the interpreter and elsewhere but please join me in thanking Tanya and before you all leave I've been asked to remind you that and you may be sitting on them now there are some subscription forms on your seat so please do remember to renew your subscriptions to the Lowy lecture series and see you all next time thank you