I have not engaged with Parliament before. I have personal experience related to international development issues. I live in London so I am able to travel if invited to pitch my idea.

The International Development Committee should prioritise examining lead poisoning as a critical development challenge. While I was a researcher at Rethink Priorities, a report I co-wrote in 2021 (https://rethinkpriorities.org/research-area/global-lead-exposure-report/) found that lead exposure causes severe health and income burdens, on the order of $5 trillion in economic costs and over 600 million children affected annually. Despite this scale of impact, this area is neglected because 94% of the lead exposure burden occurs in low- and middle-income countries, making this an ideal area for development partnerships that move beyond traditional aid relationships.

Parliamentary scrutiny would increase transparency around the FCDO's current approach to tackling lead poisoning and support evidence-based recommendations to improve the UK's work in this area. This would enable the FCDO to catch up to organisations like USAID and NORAD, which are already taking significant action on this issue. Our research found that the health burden from lead exposure is at least half that of malaria, yet donors spend at least ten times less addressing it.

The timing is particularly opportune given the growing global momentum around lead pollution prevention, exemplified by the "Partnership for a Lead Free Future" launched in September 2024. This partnership includes Bangladesh, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Norway and the USA, building on existing collaborative frameworks like the Global Alliance to Eliminate Lead Paint.

The UK should throw its full diplomatic weight behind this partnership and allocate a significant proportion of the expected 2025/26 ODA increase (worth £450 million) to become the partnership's largest national donor. This would advance the partnership's mission to end childhood lead poisoning by 2040 while demonstrating a shift from paternalism to genuine partnership with LMIC governments. Given estimated annual GDP losses of $1.4 trillion from lead poisoning, this investment would deliver exceptional value for money.

When we conducted our research in 2021, NGOs were spending only $6-10 million per year globally addressing this issue. Since then, several organisations have expanded their work, and both country governments and philanthropies are increasing their involvement through initiatives like the Lead Exposure Action Fund and the Lead-Free Future Partnership. I would be proud to see the UK join these efforts.

Priority areas for UK support could include highly cost-effective interventions like lead paint regulation advocacy, programs to increase formal recycling of lead acid batteries, and cleanup of toxic hotspots. Additionally, research funding is needed for blood lead level measurements and exposure pathway studies in neglected regions, which would help target interventions more effectively.

Dr David Bernard