The mainstream media in Australia highlight our politicians’ travels abroad as though they’ve uncovered corruption.

I was interested by a recent report in the Fairfax media on the Victorian Speaker of the House Telmo Languiler’s travels to Latin America and Asia.
The report reflected a form of cultural cringe disguised as concern for the taxpayer’s money.

Telmo Languiller spent over $50,000 “on overseas travel last financial year − including two separate taxpayer-funded trips to his country of birth, Uruguay”.

Telmo Languiler, the first Uruguayan heritage Speaker of the House, travelled to Uruguay, Cuba and Argentina. In Uruguay he met with the vice president of Uruguay at a “total cost of $12,676”.

Surely $13,000 for travel to Latin America, if it includes accommodation, daily expenses, meetings and airfare is not excessive.

He is a senior politician and if the investment in his travels facilitates Victoria’s economic and cultural interests in Latin America − a growing market for our services and goods − then it’s a good thing. The report’s emphasis on the Speaker of the House having a “taxpayer-funded trip to his country of birth” was intriguing.

Latin America is important to our economy and culture, so an Uruguayan Australian and politician then can play a key role as a conduit between the state and Latin America. Languiler understands the psyche of Latin America, the way of doing business, it is the land of his birth, and as an Australian he used his linguistic and cultural skills to represent our interests across the Spanish-speaking continent and Caribbean.

Using the culturally-diverse members of parliament to promote our interests internationally is a key to Australia’s productive and creative diversity. Latin America’s role in Victorian trade was highlighted in a recent Victoria government release: “Trade between Victoria and Latin America generally has more than doubled in the past 10 years, with a substantial increase of 25 per cent in the last four years alone.”

I would rather have my politicians learning from overseas examples, promoting cultural exchange and creating trade opportunities rather than spouting anti-internationalist jingoism.

When an Australian medical specialist working for a publicly-funded hospital attends an international conference we see this as building knowledge from international research on diseases and health challenges. When publicly-funded arts workers attend an international forum it is a great thing for Australia’s cultural trade and learning.

We have financial and marketing support by federal and state governments for business trade delegations. The Victorian state government under Coalition and Labor hosts trade delegations to Asia and other key target areas at the expense of the taxpayer. These investments result in jobs, innovation, creative and intellectual exchanges.

From my brief moment as a political advisor I remember the fear at any suggestion we should tell media when a politician would travel overseas. In 2011 a group of Hellenic parliamentarians, government and opposition, were invited to attend the World Hellenic Inter-Parliamentary Association forum in Athens.
Victoria was not footing the bill, the Greek government paid for it. The Herald Sun title ran ‘Greece is the word for junket MPs’, and condemned the Victorian politicians for putting pressure on Greece’s ailing economy.

The convention was important given more Hellenes live outside Greece than in it. Hellenic politicians from across the globe would be looking for solutions for Greece and solutions that benefited their nations. A Hellenic member of parliament from Victoria would meet their counterpart from Canada, USA, South Africa and Brazil, and build cooperation resulting in economic and cultural outcomes. The Herald Sun attack limited our ability to promote the importance of the travel to the electorate, forcing some Victorian politicians to withdraw their attendance.

The president of the association and former Victorian tourism minister John Pandazopoulos said “the cost of democracy is having to spend money” and added “this is about politician-to-politician relationships. At the end of the day, politicians drive public policy. The idea is about knowledge building, politicians having to talk to each other, not just government bureaucracy to government bureaucracy”.

Our open and mostly fair liberal democracy and our good economy have empowered us to learn from the rest of the world. Our cultural diversity has opened new economic, cultural paths globally, we deal well with Asia, we have deep links to Europe, we are English speakers and share political systems with South Africa, the USA, Great Britain and Canada. So why are we so intent on making our politicians less effective in representing our interests and us internationally?