DFID-FCO Merger

The merger aims to integrate development policy with foreign policy decision-making to maximize the impact and influence of aid. It will start immediately, be completed by September, and there are no plans for compulsory redundancies or changes to the 0.7% GNI commitment. The Prime Minister will set overall international strategy through the National Security Council.

The merger has been roundly condemned by three former Prime Ministers and questions are raised about its timing during the pandemic, lack of consultation with NGOs or unions, job security for DFID employees, retention of a Cabinet Minister position for international development, oversight of aid spending, commitment to current projects and recipients, and consistency with the Prime Minister's policy ambitions.

He emphasises the importance of maintaining the ethos and expertise of DFID in the new structure while integrating foreign policy. He agrees that the merger offers an opportunity to align aid, foreign policy, trade, defence, and wider security matters more closely.

The merger of DFID undermines its effectiveness, transparency, and ability to deliver targeted aid. It also questions the timing and process of the decision-making.

Defends the merger as a necessary step to integrate foreign policy with development and ensure greater efficiency during the pandemic. Highlights that the aid budget will remain at 0.7% of GNI, and reiterates that other developed countries have not maintained separate development departments.

Supports the merger to maximise resources for UK's global position, but questions whether integrating DIT into FCDO would make more sense.

Strongly opposes the merger as unforgivable amid a pandemic. Questions lack of consultation with international development organisations and Cabinet.

Proposes using overseas aid to create an apprentice scheme for young people to work in developing countries, suggesting it would help both the recipients and participants.

Raises concerns about implications of merger on DFID staff, urges clarity regarding future projects and funding agreements, and questions need for an ODA Select Committee.

The interconnectedness of the modern world means that no one is safe until we are all safe, especially in response to the coronavirus pandemic. The sudden merging of DFID and FCO without parliamentary scrutiny or consultation raises concerns about aid being tilted towards richer countries like Ukraine and the lack of a dedicated Cabinet Minister responsible for international development.

Asked whether claims that this merger will take money from the world’s poorest are false and if this is part of a programme to integrate British overseas policy more coherently.

Around 600 jobs in DFID's East Kilbride office may be at risk due to the merger, causing anxiety for staff and their families. Requested a meeting with the Secretary of State to discuss these issues.

As a former merged Minister in both FCO and DFID, she supports the merger but seeks reassurances that the Secretary of State will be a strong voice for the world’s poorest at Cabinet level and that aid spending priorities will remain unchanged.

Expressed regret over the downgrade of DFID's status, arguing that it undermines the consensus on international development. Suggested there is a difference between focusing on moral duty and national interest, but the Secretary of State disagreed.

Suggested learning from other countries like Australia, Canada, and New Zealand which integrate foreign policy and aid effectively within their Foreign Ministries.

Raised concerns about the risk of repeating past scandals where aid was tied to foreign policy objectives at the expense of moral duty, such as the Pergau dam scandal under the Conservative Government.

Welcomed the announcement and asked how social justice programmes like education for girls would continue to receive priority within a more complex framework.

Suggested that merging DFID with FCO is a distraction in the middle of an emergency. Concerned about the risk of aid being misspent on foreign security projects which could lead to human rights abuses.

Says that the merger is justified by current practice and that officials in places like Nigeria already work on an integrated basis.

Confirms the merger aims to bring together aid, development, and foreign policy functions for maximum effectiveness. Emphasises the importance of not siloing international security functions.

Expresses concern that DFID's critical role in global health and HIV response may be diluted under the new structure, questioning whether the FCO can handle these priorities effectively.

Responds by affirming that key priorities like HIV will remain a top priority in the new administrative structures and that political effort will be maximised on those areas.

Welcomes the merger as necessary for boosting global Britain, emphasising the legal commitment to spending 0.7% of national income on aid and advocating for making best use of resources.

Reiterates that the merger is about strategic objectives and ensuring foreign policy, aid, and international goals are brought together effectively.

Criticises the Prime Minister's mocking attitude towards aid and expresses doubt regarding the government's commitment to poverty reduction at home and abroad.

Defends the Prime Minister’s previous work in foreign policy and commits to maintaining strategic objectives and results for taxpayers’ money.

Welcomes the merger but asks about the role of the Independent Commission for Aid Impact, and questions whether terms and conditions will be levelled up or down.

Reassures Murrison that there is a commitment to maintaining scrutiny over the aid budget and retaining expertise from DFID staff.

Asks about the importance of sexual and reproductive health rights in future ODA, thanking Raab for his previous work as Foreign Secretary.

Reaffirms that public health goals will not be diluted and expresses gratitude towards Wheeler’s contribution to the Asia-Pacific region.

Opposes the politicisation of international aid, asking Raab to meet NGOs to discuss implementing the merger effectively.

Responds by explaining that NGOs’ interests are understandable given their reliance on aid funding and reiterates the commitment to effectiveness in delivering strategic objectives.

Expresses concern that the merger will undermine Britain's influence in Africa, arguing that diplomacy should be driven by British interests while development must benefit African countries.

Disagrees with Onwurah’s view and argues for the effectiveness of bringing together aid, development, and foreign policy objectives in conflict zones like Africa.

Initially concerned about the merger but now trusts Raab to deliver value for money with the aid budget and believes he will do so effectively.

Agrees with Merriman’s trust, reiterating commitment to delivering results while maximising value for taxpayers' money through a coordinated approach.

Questions the lack of consultation in announcing the merger and expresses concern about collective responsibility and transparency being compromised.

Responds dismissively to Huq’s political criticism, focusing instead on the need for innovation and effectiveness during the coronavirus crisis.

Welcomes the merger's promise of coordination and synergy but asks about a comprehensive strategy for combining soft and hard power.

Reiterates that the merger aims to be as effective as possible during the coronavirus challenge, bringing together security factors and wider strategic views.