Have Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop been reading my thesis?

It has been a strange fortnight or so, since Australia voted.  Our new government promised to be a no-surprises affair, and to be honest, many of the policy announcements are very predictable, if not from previously announced policies (i.e. Asylum seeker policy, climate change policy), then certainly from previously expressed ideology (University Amenities Fees). 

However, the changes to AusAID that have been mooted, changes that remain unclear at this stage, have been quite a surprise for me and others.  I won’t hash over the details of what should or shouldn’t happen with AusAID now that Tony Abbott has flagged...well...changes, for that you can read some excellent work on the Devpolicy blog, but I would note that the Coalition had indicated they would have introduced a  Minister for International Development if they had won the 2010 election.  That seems a big change in approach to make but I suppose priorities change.

Perhaps rather than seeing this situation as potentially terrible, I need to look on the bright side.  It seems, perhaps that Julie Bishop and Tony Abbott have read my thesis, and extrapolated it a little.  In my conclusion I stated:

What is demonstrated, therefore, is that while the ADS [Australian Development Scholarships] do not meet the development objectives set for it, as a government funded program it has great potential.  What is required is a rethinking of the approach of the ADS, moving it from a Development focussed activity, to a diplomatic focussed activity.  The greatest benefits to be gained from the scholarship program are diplomatic, with development outcomes a potentially positive side effect. (Kent, 2012, p61)

All you really need to do is swap “ADS” for “the entire aid budget”, and you really describe the Coalition’s policy direction.  So, rather than mope about, perhaps I need to be selling my skills as a Ministerial adviser and policy developer.

In all seriousness though, the movement of the aid program to a more trade focussed footing plays is potentially great news for the Australia Awards.  I did note in a previous post that the New Colombo Plan has the potential to make uncertain the future of the Australia Awards, however, diplomacy is one area that the Australia Awards can clearly demonstrate their effectiveness.

My thesis also suggests that moving the Australian Development Awards (now known as the Australia Awards) to DFAT would free up aid funding for more demonstrably effective tertiary education programs.  While it is yet to be seen how the announced funding cuts will be enacted, and Tony Abbott’s announcement about how the changes to AusAID does not give much of an indication about how things will play out, I think the Australia Awards are in a good position to survive any cuts.  An aid program that is clearly, inexplicably and almost totally linked to Australia’s national interest has got to be at the head of the class, and I’m happy to send my thesis to Julie Bishop if she’d like some supporting evidence.