Cross-party committee expresses “deep concern” at international aid cuts in letter to Prime Minister

• Correspondence to the Prime Minister relating to Reductions to the ODA budget 
• International Development Committee

Last week the government announced that it would fund a rise in defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 by reducing the UK’s aid budget, known as official development assistance (ODA) from 0.5% to 0.3% of GNI by 2027.

In the letter the Chair of the Committee, Sarah Champion, asks whether in-country donor refugee costs, namely the money spent by the Home Office on housing refugees in hotels, will continue to be classified as aid spending.

She also asks how much control the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) will retain over how ODA is spent across the government, and whether it will keep its responsibility as “spender and saver of last resort”.

“Increased defence spending is undeniably needed and to be welcomed,” the Chair writes. “However, our development spend protects not only the most vulnerable across the world but also the UK’s security, not least by helping to prevent conflict in the first place.”

She adds that the “brutal” further cut to ODA risks undermining the UK’s soft power and progress on issues like healthcare, education and clean water. It will have “dire consequences for millions of marginalised people across the world,” she writes.

The Chair’s letter comes as members of the International Development and Foreign Affairs committees are set to debate the FCDO’s use of public money on Wednesday 5th March. The debate is broadly focused on supplementary estimates – the money required to amend spending plans approved in main estimates – but is likely to feature significant discussion of the recent cuts to aid. 

Chair comment

Sarah Champion MP, Chair of the International Development Committee, said:

“One of the cheapest and most effective ways to prevent conflict is to address the causes of instability before they spiral into violence. That’s what international aid can do.

In reality, cutting aid to pay for increased defence will inevitably mean spending more money on responding to conflicts rather than investing in prevention – it should never be either/or. We need both to make a stable and secure world.

The fact that Home Office raids on the aid budget to fund refugee costs in the UK will likely continue means there will be precious little to actually go on keeping people safe and prosperous in their own countries.

I am deeply concerned about this cut and have asked the Prime Minister to provide more information on how it will work in practice. In the meantime, I look forward to hearing colleague’s views on how the UK can help deliver a safer, more prosperous world in Wednesday’s debate.”

• About Parliament: Select committees
• Visiting Parliament: Watch committees

Image credit: Pixabay