Budget week puts Australia’s aid ambitions on the line

A grim tale emerges in the latest figures from the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee. After years of nominal increases, global levels of official development assistance (ODA) fell by 23% in one year.

Nothing about the global context warrants declining resources. If anything, the case for sustained development cooperation has strengthened. Climate shocks are intensifying, conflict is proliferating, and trust in multilateralism is under strain.

In this context, cuts to ODA carry real risks for global security, for economic stability, and for the prospects of millions of people whose lives are shaped by decisions made far beyond their borders.

Nowhere is this more evident than in financing for gender equality.

OECD data from 2024 show that while the share of ODA that integrates gender equality as a policy objective sits at 47% of bilateral allocable aid, funding that places gender equality as a principal objective remains stubbornly low at just 4%. Many of these principally focused projects are implemented by feminist organisations and movements, who have been consistently proven the most effective actors at making gains in gender equality. In other words, more projects aim to advance gender equality, but very few resources are going to the most effective actors.

Decisions made in Canberra will determine not only the size of Australia’s aid program, but the kind of partner Australia chooses to be.

At the same time, overall ODA constraints mean that even gains in mainstreaming gender equality are happening with a shrinking pool of funds. When budgets tighten, gender equality is often among the first areas to be scaled back.

This matters because gender equality is not an “add-on” to development but foundational. Evidence consistently shows that investments in gender equality deliver outsized returns – improving health outcomes, strengthening economies, and contributing to more peaceful and resilient societies.

For Australia, the release of the OECD figures comes at a telling moment. With the federal budget to be handed down this week, decisions made in Canberra will determine not only the size of Australia’s aid program, but the kind of partner Australia chooses to be.

No doubt there are voices calling for Australia to cut its aid budget. When the world’s major donors scale back, it can feel politically defensible to follow suit. After all, there is a certain logic to being in “good company”.

But what happens when that company is heading in the wrong direction?

Leadership is not only about alignment, but also about judgement – recognising when collective momentum is misaligned with shared interests and values and having the conviction to chart a different course. For Australia to retreat now would be to undo years of partnership and impact. It would signal a narrowing of ambition at a time when regional partners are facing widening challenges.

The challenge for Australia is to hold steady and recognise that consistency is itself leadership. It means investing in what works, even when it means looking beyond the next election cycle. That requires convincing the Australian public about the deep interrelationship between regional stability and Australia’s own prosperity and being willing to define success not by comparison with others, but by alignment with principles.

At a time when collective ambition is faltering, the example that Australia makes will be as important as the company it keeps.