3 Responses

  1. Paul Oates
    Paul Oates July 9, 2016 at 5:59 pm

    To compare Australia’s Overseas Development Assistance spending to our Defence spending is like comparing apples with oranges.

    Defence spending is made up of two main aspects. Personnel and Equipment. Spending traditionally hovers between these two aspects. Our expenditure was in peacetime hovering around three percent of GDP and that has dropped over the recent years to around 2%. If discussion was to centre on the relevant costs of predator drones as opposed to Joint Strike Fighter/bombers I could understand the debate. The concept of purchasing a very expensive purchase over many years must be budgeted and managed over the life of the hardware.

    The issue of reduced Overseas Aid is a totally different concept however and aside from an ethical debate about what to fund and where, the issue is one of expectations versus outcomes.

    We at least can review and discuss the relative benefits of military hardware after they have been purchased and operated.

    What is never discussed or debated is what value we get for the money we spend on overseas aid. The only way an effective analysis can be made of our aid spending is to first set objectives and targets to be achieved. Since this never seems to happen, how can we effectively compare the two areas of expenditure?

    That is, unless we are trying to compare the ethical value of the two as opposed to the actual objectives being achieved each year.

  2. Kimani
    Kimani July 4, 2016 at 6:12 pm

    For me i think its good to balance defence spending and aid. This will mean funds are going back to the communities to assist in social development.

Leave a Reply