Introduction

In recent years, Australian public discourse has increasingly scrutinized the allocation of government resources, particularly in light of pressing domestic challenges such as homelessness.

Reports backed by government statistics on homelessness, suggest that homelessness affects Australians at the rate of approximately 3,000 Australians per hour seeking assistance for emergency and permanent accommodation, highlighting a crisis of significant magnitude. Despite this, government expenditure has prioritized international commitments, such as aid to Ukraine, and domestic initiatives like the $4 billion Domestic Violence Prevention Campaign, building of new sports arenas, which some argue disproportionately focuses on specific demographics.

This essay critically evaluates these spending priorities, exploring disparities in support for victims of domestic violence and the neglect of homelessness, particularly among women and families. It argues that government funding often aligns with media-driven narratives rather than objective need, leaving vulnerable populations underserved.

Government Spending Priorities: A Question of Balance

The Australian government’s financial commitments reflect a complex interplay of domestic and international obligations. Significant allocations, such as $4 billion for domestic violence prevention and substantial foreign aid, demonstrate a commitment to addressing both local and global issues. However, these priorities raise questions when juxtaposed against the scale of homelessness. With thousands of Australians seeking shelter daily, the absence of comparable investment in housing solutions suggests a misalignment between government action and public need.

International aid, including support for Ukraine, is often justified as a moral and strategic imperative. Yet, critics argue that countries receiving aid may have less acute needs than Australia’s homeless population. Similarly, the Domestic Violence Prevention Campaign, while addressing a critical issue, has been criticized for its perceived gender bias, focusing primarily on female victims. This focus risks overlooking male victims and other vulnerable groups, such as homeless women and children, who receive less public or financial support.

Disparities in Support for Victims: The Role of Media and Public Narrative- Brittany Higgins

A notable case illustrating the influence of media on government spending is that of Brittany Higgins, whose allegations of sexual assault in a parliamentary workplace garnered significant attention. Higgins received a reported $3 million in compensation following a civil case, despite public and judicial skepticism about the veracity of her claims. The case, adjudicated on the lower civil burden of proof, contrasts sharply with the experiences of other sexual assault victims, many of whom endure brutal assaults proven under stricter criminal standards yet receive minimal compensation or recognition.

This disparity raises questions about equity in victim support. Why do some victims, particularly those with media backing, receive substantial financial and social support while others do not? Critics argue that government funding for domestic violence initiatives often flows to media campaigns, public relations firms, and advocacy groups that amplify specific narratives. For instance, the Higgins case was accompanied by high-profile protests and media coverage, which is now widely known to have been orchestrated by professional media strategists (including those funded by government). Such efforts, while raising awareness, may divert resources from direct victim support to narrative-building exercises that prioritize visibility over substance.

The Homelessness Crisis: A Neglected Priority

Homelessness in Australia represents a crisis of far greater scale than domestic violence, yet it receives comparatively little attention. The hourly influx of 3,000 individuals seeking relief underscores the urgency of the issue. Many of these individuals are women, often with children, whose plight lacks the media amplification afforded to other causes. The government’s inaction is compounded by systemic issues, such as the role of foreign investment in inflating property prices. The Foreign Investment Review Board, tasked with overseeing such transactions, has been criticized for its leniency, allowing foreign buyers to purchase Australian properties at exorbitant rates, thereby exacerbating housing unaffordability.

Real estate agencies, lawyers, and accountants often facilitate these transactions, acting as intermediaries for foreign investors while the government remains largely silent. This silence contrasts with the vocal advocacy for issues like domestic violence, suggesting that political will is influenced by public visibility rather than objective need. The promise of affordable housing remains unfulfilled, leaving homeless women and families without the support afforded to other groups.

Political Context and Public Accountability

The Australian Labor Party’s (ALP) victory in the May 2025 federal election has been attributed, in part, to the Liberal-National Coalition’s failure to effectively engage voters. However, the ALP’s approach to homelessness and victim support has yet to demonstrate a significant shift from previous policies. The lack of a high-profile advocacy movement, akin to the domestic violence campaigns, leaves homeless individuals without a platform to demand change. This absence of public pressure allows the government to prioritize issues with greater media traction, perpetuating inequities in resource allocation.

Conclusion

The Australian government’s spending priorities reveal a troubling disconnect between public need and political action. While initiatives like the Domestic Violence Prevention Campaign and international aid are important, their prominence overshadows the homelessness crisis, which affects thousands daily. The disparity in support for victims, exemplified by the Brittany Higgins case, highlights the influence of media narratives in shaping government largesse. To address these imbalances, policymakers must prioritize evidence-based resource allocation, ensuring that vulnerable populations, particularly homeless women and families, receive the support they urgently need. Greater transparency in the distribution of funds and a commitment to equitable victim support are essential steps toward a more just and inclusive society.

Ivana Johari and Natalie D’Cruz