Changing the way we think about Australia's responsibilities in our new global world?
Eradication of poverty, empowerment of women and increasing educational and income opportunities in the developing countries from which victims are trafficked are important priorities in the prevention of sex trafficking. Programs that address these require funding. Scrutiny of Australia’s international aid program should therefore also be within the scope of sex trafficking advocacy. As a developed nation, Australia made a commitment in 2000 to raise its foreign aid budget to 0.7% of gross national income. This target was twice deferred by previous Labour governments. The Abbott government recently congratulated itself on restructuring foreign aid to increase efficiency and prioritise the Australian economy rather than the commitment we are billions of dollars short of upholding. (Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-shame-that-is-abbotts-foreign-aid-policy-20131101-2wrxt.html#ixzz2x31vD3l8) The fact that our aid allocation aligns with our own political or economic priorities is not an Abbott innovation, it has been this way in the past. It is important to think about whether foreign aid is something that should be designed to meet those with the greatest needs or to meet the greatest needs of Australia. The nature of current foreign policy rhetoric indicates that Australians view our economy, culture as disconnected from the fate and well-being of people who suffer in neighbouring lands, and in our new globalised world it's just not an assumption we can safely make (see our post about what fuels the demand for sex trafficking victims in Australia).













