← Back to House of Commons Debates
ODA Budget
26 April 2021
Lead MP
James Cleverly
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
TaxationClimateForeign Affairs
Other Contributors: 40
At a Glance
James Cleverly raised concerns about oda budget in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
The pandemic has led to a significant economic downturn and increased public debt, necessitating the reduction of UK's official development assistance target from 0.7% to 0.5% of GNI temporarily. Despite this cut, the UK will still spend £10 billion on aid in 2021, making it the third largest donor in the G7 by percentage of GNI. The focus is now on strategic priorities including climate and biodiversity, global health security, girls' education, humanitarian preparedness, science and technology, open societies, conflict resolution, and economic development. The commitment to return to 0.7% when fiscal conditions allow remains unchanged.
Andrew Mitchell
Con
Sutton Coldfield
Question
Why is Britain cutting aid when other nations are increasing theirs? Does the Government understand that this undermines key allies and endangers troops?
Minister reply
Despite economic challenges, UK remains a major donor. The reduction is temporary until fiscal conditions allow return to 0.7%. Diplomatic efforts will amplify aid impact in areas like girls’ education.
Preet Kaur Gill
Lab Co-op
Birmingham Edgbaston
Question
Why was the Foreign Secretary’s statement light on detail and how will cuts impact countries like Yemen and Syria?
Minister reply
The reduction is due to unprecedented economic conditions. Despite this, the UK remains committed to being a major aid donor at 2.5% of GNI. Scrutiny is welcomed.
Peter Bottomley
Con
Tunbridge Wells
Question
The British Government first committed to the 0.7% target in the year I first stood for Parliament. They would reach the target when they could; it took 39 years. The Minister’s prepared statement said that the Government intend to get back to 0.7% when circumstances allow. If they said that would be next year, the House would partly understand, but as the Minister has not, we have to assume that it will be more than a year. How much would be saved by the reduction in the economy—the 11.2% to which he referred? That would be a big cut, but it is provided for in the legislation. Will he kindly read out the words that the current Prime Minister reinforced in our 2019 manifesto, when he added the word “proudly” to the commitment that repeated what was said by two previous Conservative Prime Ministers?
Minister reply
I completely understand the point my hon. Friend makes. No one could have predicted the once-in-a-generation health and economic event that was covid-19 and we had to take unprecedented action to respond to it. The quicker we can get the British economy back into shape, the quicker we can get back to committing to development expenditure at the level we would all want it to be at.
Chris Law
SNP
Dundee Central
Question
Last week, the Secretary of State admitted not only that 60% cuts would fall on Yemen, but also no impact assessment had been undertaken. Was it a difficult decision to use the money to deliver a windfall for the defence budget and increase spending on nuclear weapons? The global covid pandemic should not be used as an excuse to cut aid. Indeed, it is our essential duty to increase support to the world’s most vulnerable during this crisis. While this Government are intent on breaking their manifesto commitment to maintaining the 0.7% target, the SNP has pledged to increase the Scottish Government’s aid budget by 50%. The G7 have increased their aid spending as a result of covid; over 200 NGOs accused this Government of delivering a “tragic blow” to the world’s poorest people. Does the Minister believe that the G7 and all these NGOs are wrong?
Minister reply
The UK remains one of the most generous ODA-donating countries in both absolute terms and percentage of GNI terms. We have donated over half a billion pounds to support COVAX to help vaccinate the poorest countries in the world. The UK Government had to make difficult decisions due to the impact of coronavirus.
Theresa May
Con
Not Specified
Question
The integrated review identifies the United Kingdom as a “soft power superpower”, citing our contribution to international development. How is this position going to be enhanced by cutting aid to the world’s poorest, including those in slavery? Slavery was not even referred to in the written statement issued by the Foreign Secretary last week.
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right that the UK is viewed globally as a soft power superpower. Our development expenditure is an important part of this and we are committed to getting back to 0.7% when the fiscal situation allows.
Sarah Champion
Lab
Rotherham
Question
Over the last 12 months, this Government have asset-stripped our foreign aid programme, damaging the UK’s global standing, security and soft power. All this was done without consultation or scrutiny by this House or the aid sector. Can the Minister please tell us the date when this House will be told the funding allocation for aid projects by countries? When will he publish the impact assessment that should have been done alongside the decision?
Minister reply
The written ministerial statement was put out so that the hon. Lady’s Committee would be able to scrutinise the Foreign Secretary. We are still in the process of making detailed decisions and more details will be forthcoming as we go through country by country and theme by theme.
Thomas Tugendhat
Con
Tonbridge
Question
The Minister realises that the rest of the world is not standing still. Others are filling the gaps that we leave, and votes in the United Nations and different support elements are going according to those power dynamics. Can the Minister assure me that the decisions being taken will be in keeping with the other decisions that the Foreign Office is taking in reinforcing our bilateral interests? Of course, aid spending is not actually about foreigners; it is about us and supporting the world we live in and making sure we are able to communicate, travel and operate around the world. Will he assure me that that in that integration, although we are committed legally to multilaterals we will not forget the bilateral commitments we have made, which are so much more easily dropped?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point. The UK is proud of its role in multilateral forums around the world and also maintains very strong bilateral relationships.
Layla Moran
Lib Dem
Oxford West and Abingdon
Question
Announcing these deep, potentially unlawful aid cuts through a written statement was cowardly. Last week, the all-party group on coronavirus heard that the cuts are likely to result in hurting scientists’ ability to catch new variants abroad—variants that may well threaten our own recovery here. Although £1.3 billion has been allocated to coronavirus and global health, there has been no detail on country-specific allocations. Can the Minister provide clarity now? Can he assure the House that he understands that no one is safe until everyone is safe?
Minister reply
The UK has been a leading country in funding COVAX to ensure poorer countries have vaccinations as part of their arsenal against coronavirus. We are committing to a significant investment in science and technology and research as part of our ODA expenditure.
Question
The Foreign Secretary put out the statement at gone 5 o’clock the night before we met at 9 o’clock the following morning, so he did not give much time for anybody to digest what was in it and there was not much in it to start with. I am deeply saddened and very upset that we are going to be balancing the books in this country on the backs of the poorest in the world. When are the Government going to come clean and be honest about where these cuts to lifesaving humanitarian aid will fall? How many women and children will die as a result? Is it more or is it fewer than the 100,000 estimated by the leading think-tanks and NGOs?
Minister reply
There is always a balance between the earliest points at which information, and the detail of that information, can be shared. We are not yet in a position where we can share the granularity of either thematic programmes or country programmes. However, we remain committed to being one of the most generous ODA-donating countries in the world.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
Will the Minister outline how we can possibly fulfil our moral obligation to nations who rely on our support, especially those in the Commonwealth? Will he and the Department rethink this decision which is tantamount to a death sentence for many people?
Minister reply
I completely understand the passion with which the hon. Gentleman speaks. The UK is still committed to more than has been the historic norm under Governments of other political persuasions, and we will return to 0.7% as soon as fiscal circumstances allow.
Question
The awful scenes in India are having a deeply personal impact here. The UK committed £330 million per year to Gavi through 2025 but it is not enough. What more can we do, through the Minister’s good offices, to export our vaccine miracle to our historical friends in India?
Minister reply
India remains a close friend of the United Kingdom. We have moved quickly to help supply oxygen-related technologies and are committed to ensuring that the scientific breakthroughs will be shared globally around the world.
Jeremy Corbyn
Ind
Islington North
Question
The Minister says Britain has a huge commitment to the poorest but we cut aid budgets while increasing arms expenditure. What kind of message is it that we cut aid expenditure and increase defence by £24 billion and massively increase nuclear warheads?
Minister reply
Security and the alleviation of pain and suffering go hand in hand. All around the world, the prevention and resolution of conflict is the most significant positive move to alleviate pain and suffering. That is why the integrated review looks across defence and security as well as diplomacy and development.
John Redwood
Con
Question
Is the UK now stopping making overseas aid payments through the EU, given the way it has been spending money on a country such as China? Is this not an opportunity for the UK to express its own moral priorities and secure better value for money by making more of its own direct choices and payments?
Minister reply
Having left the European Union, the United Kingdom can now make its own decisions. We have significantly reduced our aid support to China; the only expenditure now is in support of human rights and open societies.
Barry Sheerman
Lab
Harrow West
Question
I regard the Minister as an honourable man, but the Prime Minister does not believe at all in international aid. We should have been at the front with a massive aid package for India and friends there are working on the frontline. Why not hold a vote in the House because this was not in the Conservative party manifesto?
Minister reply
The Prime Minister is committed to supporting poor and suffering people around the world. We remain one of the most generous aid donor countries in the world, despite unprecedented economic contraction.
Jeremy Hunt
Con
Godalming and Waverley
Question
Why do the Government not commit to returning to 0.7% when OBR says the economy will return to pre-pandemic levels of activity in quarter 2 next year? According to Save the Children, 400,000 children in Yemen will not be fed because of this cut in British aid.
Minister reply
These are difficult decisions we had to make. The best gift we can give to the people of Yemen is peace and that is what we are pursuing while also maintaining our commitment to support people, feed people and try to keep them alive until peace comes.
Tony Lloyd
Lab
Question
Yemen will suffer some 60% cuts in development assistance, yet it is a country where children are dying of preventable disease and now of starvation. Would the Minister seriously say to a mother or father nursing a dying child that this is all about the economy?
Minister reply
The UK remains one of the largest aid donors to Yemen. We are also giving support to Martin Griffiths, the UN envoy, and liaising with parties in the region to try to bring about a resolution to that conflict.
Nusrat Ghani
Con
Sussex Weald
Question
Instability in Afghanistan and growing confidence of Taliban are a threat to international security. Can the Minister give assurance that an assessment has been made of withdrawing support to Afghanistan, especially the impact on Afghan women and girls who rely on us for education and basic healthcare?
Minister reply
We think carefully about all decisions we make and remain committed to women, peace and security as an agenda and the education of women and girls in particular.
Daniel Zeichner
Lab
Cambridge
Question
We have heard a succession of senior Conservatives condemn this decision as “shameful”. As well as the humanitarian costs, the ODA cuts have a direct impact on UK research and development. The Royal Society tells us that its programmes are being cut by around 70%. Can the Minister tell me whether the Government were aware of those consequences when the decision was made and whether he has seen or carried out any impact assessment?
Minister reply
It is the normal process of this Department and its predecessor Department to speak regularly with our delivery partners and opinion formers in the sectors with which we work. The decisions we made are difficult, and they are driven by the economic circumstances. As I have said a number of times, we will get back up to the 0.7% to reinforce the sectors that the hon. Member speaks about as soon as the fiscal situation allows.
Question
Can my right hon. Friend update the House on the pivot away from UK taxpayers’ money being used in aid to totalitarian countries such as China towards more open and democratic parts of the world?
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that point. The UK is committed to supporting democracy and political stability around the world. He will have seen in the written ministerial statement the commitment that the Foreign Secretary made to reducing our ODA expenditure in China and focusing it exclusively on human rights and open societies.
Question
To paraphrase the journalist Ben Taub, radicalisation lies in a shallow grave. Can the Minister advise the House how reducing refugee support in Syria from the £137 million pledged last year to £45 million this year will not play a part in resurrecting radicalisation in Syria and the wider middle east?
Minister reply
We completely understand that instability and failed economies are drivers of terrorism and radicalisation. That is why the UK remains committed to supporting Governments around the world in both maintaining their economic stability and alleviating the suffering of displaced people, and we will continue to do so.
Question
From covid to Ebola to malaria, we have all seen how important international scientific research is, and we are proud to be a world leader in this. If we are to continue that progress, it does not make sense to cut those international budgets just when their importance is so clear. Will the Minister meet with scientists and find a way to ensure that these vital research programmes can continue uninterrupted?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend makes a good point. The FCDO has committed £253 million on R&D this year across the seven themes. Of course, we are always keen to hear from expert voices. I cannot make a commitment that we can necessarily respond in the way that they would want us to, because of the fiscal situation that I have discussed, but we absolutely recognise that science and technology in so many areas—for example, in covid—is the key that unlocks many of the world’s challenges.
Christine Jardine
Lib Dem
Edinburgh West
Question
The Government’s reductions in the overseas development aid budget, FCDO research spending cuts and now other departmental cuts, according to the research profession, amount to more than half a billion pounds lost to research. Does the Minister agree that, while we battle a once-in-a-generation pandemic, the effects of which across the world we see every night on our TV screens, science is at the heart of many of the solutions we desperately need and that the Government need to continue to invest in and grow science talent and champions of evidence around the globe, not step back in this way?
Minister reply
The work that the science community around the world has done in bringing vaccines to bear as quickly as it has is a testament to how important this sector is. The UK absolutely remains committed to being a global leader in science, technology and research, and we will do that both domestically in the UK and internationally through our ODA expenditure.
Edward Leigh
Con
Gainsborough
Question
I am no pinko leftie and I sometimes pointed out distortions caused by the 0.7% commitment at the end of the financial year, but I am completely mystified from a public accounts point of view about what is going on here. Is it not a fact that, because of the contraction of the economy, the aid budget would have declined by some £2.9 billion anyway? The Minister is now imposing another £4 billion cut on that. We are causing complete chaos, with international development staff all running around trying to cut the budget. Now, by the Minister’s own logic, he is going to revert to 0.7%. We know the economy is going to bounce back, so having cut all this money, they are going to have to put it all back again. What is the logic from a public accounts perspective in what we are doing? Why are we causing such incompetence and chaos in the Department?
Minister reply
As I said, the economic situation has been forced on us by coronavirus. May I suggest that my right hon. Friend has misrepresented the situation in the FCDO in terms of the actions our officials have taken? I have been deeply impressed by the professionalism and the speed with which FCDO officials have responded to this once-in-a-generation—once-in-a-lifetime—situation. We are keen to get back up to the 0.7% as soon as the situation allows. Our officials will look very carefully at what programmes we are not able to continue with and what programmes we will be able, or would choose, to either restart or start anew once the financial situation improves.
Navendu Mishra
Lab
Stockport
Question
In 2019, the UK pledged £400 million to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative between 2020 and 2023—£100 million per year. Last week, it was confirmed that the UK will contribute only £5 million to GPEI this year—a 95% cut. Will the Minister explain how his Government will make up for 2021’s shortfall in a subsequent year, and deliver on the £400 million commitment by 2023?
Minister reply
I am not able to make commitments for future years. The economic situation is probably more unpredictable now than it has been in our lifetimes. What I can say is that we will seek to get the UK’s ODA target back up to 0.7% as soon as the fiscal situation allows.
Janet Daby
Lab
Lewisham East
Question
I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell) for asking this urgent question. The Government have claimed that improving the education of girls globally is their priority, but Save the Children estimates that the Foreign Secretary’s decision will result in a 25% cut in spending on girls’ education worldwide. The funding slash is detrimental to girls in developing countries. In the light of the cuts, does the FCDO expect to fulfil the Government’s manifesto promise?
Minister reply
The economic situation we find ourselves in is unprecedented and not one that any of us could have predicted when generating the manifesto. The hon. Lady will have heard our commitment to get back up 0.7%. Girls’ education remains a priority for the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and the Government as a whole. I am pleased that the Prime Minister has appointed my hon. Friend the Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Mrs Grant) to be his special envoy for girls’ education, and I have seen the energy that she has already applied, with alacrity, to that incredibly important work.
Question
The original 1958 aid target was 1% and covered public and private aid flows. In 2013, the OECD said that we were getting 1.21% in total. Will the Minister make sure that in the future private as well as public aid flows are recorded, so that we have an up-to-date picture of total aid spending?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point. I do not have at my fingertips the figures for private donations from the United Kingdom, but I think we all know not only that, through the UK Government, we remain one of the most generous ODA-donating countries in the world, but that the British people are incredibly generous. We can all be proud of the way the British people step up whenever there are international challenges. My hon. Friend is completely right that Government ODA spending is incredibly important, but so is the huge amount of money donated by private individuals in the UK.
Barry Gardiner
Lab
Brent West
Question
The Indian community in my constituency is traumatised by the scenes that we are seeing of the covid crisis in India. I welcome the UK’s emergency package of ventilators and oxygen concentrators, but the Minister earlier acknowledged that no country is safe until the virus is under control in every country. Is this therefore not the worst year to cut the aid budget, because by doing so he is endangering lives not only overseas but here in the UK too?
Minister reply
I have already said how proud we all should be of our support to India. This is part of a long-standing bilateral relationship, perhaps one of the strongest in our history. All I can say in response to the hon. Gentleman’s broader question about ODA is that it is driven by circumstances and that we will get back up to the 0.7% as soon as the fiscal situation allows.
Jeremy Wright
Con
Kenilworth and Southam
Question
Will my right hon. Friend explain—if not now, perhaps in writing—why the Government seek to change the 0.7% target set out in the International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Act 2015, rather than to utilise the provisions of the Act to explain why they are unable to meet it at this time? If indeed the Government are seeking to change the target and believe that they may do so without further legislation or parliamentary sanction, what does he believe that the 2015 Act was intended to do, if not to stop Governments doing exactly that?
Minister reply
The 2015 Act envisaged that there might be circumstances in which a Government would be unable to meet the 0.7% target. As I said, this is a truly unique and unprecedented set of economic circumstances. We will look to get back up to 0.7% as soon as the situation allows. We will look at the situation with regard to legislation.
Question
Will the Minister confirm—he has yet to do so—whether any impact assessment was made of the cuts, in particular to Yemen of 60%, Syria two thirds, Libya 63% and South Sudan 40%? Does he not recognise that the feeling of the House is such that those serious measures, those damaging cuts, should go to a vote of the whole House?
Minister reply
Of course the whole process that we are going through is to balance the decisions that have been forced on us by economic circumstances and the impact that they would have. The whole job of the Department is to make those incredibly difficult decisions. That is the job that we do each and every year. Those decisions have perhaps come into sharper focus this year because the economic situation has forced the reduction in our ODA expenditure, but this is what the Department does: it balances the expenditure that we have at our disposal and assesses the best way in which we can maximise the positive impact of that money.
Tobias Ellwood
Con
Bournemouth East
Question
I ask the Minister a simple question: does he think that the world will be safer or more dangerous over the next five to ten years? We know the answer to that: authoritarianism is on the rise, power bases are shifting, and international institutions are struggling as we enter a profound and dangerous era of change. Our soft power counts, and reducing our support will leave vacuums to be filled either by countries such as Russia and China pursuing a very different agenda, or by extremism, taking advantage of poor governance and insecurity. I ask the Government not to jeopardise our seat on the UN Security Council by cutting our soft power in this way.
Minister reply
I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend and the work of his Committee. He and I have discussed the integrated review, and the unpredictability and potential dangers that the future might have in store for us. That is why the integrated review is such an important document to assess our development expenditure. I absolutely hear the point that he makes about how such expenditure has an influence on our soft power standing, but he will also recognise that integrating our defence, security and diplomatic efforts is incredibly important. We enjoy a huge amount of soft power, notwithstanding this temporary reduction in our ODA expenditure. I have no doubt that once we can get back up to 0.7%, we will be able to reinforce further still the important work that we do on the international stage.
Chi Onwurah
Lab
Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West
Question
As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Africa, I am deeply disturbed that 60 African researchers on the Royal Society’s future leaders programme have been left without funding without warning because of these cuts. As MP for Newcastle University, I am deeply disturbed that funding for its global challenges hub has been cut by 70% without warning, making researchers redundant unless the university steps in. Will the Minister at least agree to remove the cap on carrying over previous years’ underspends on UK Research and Innovation ODA-funded research to help save research and jobs in Africa and the UK?
Minister reply
The Government absolutely recognise the importance of Africa, in terms of the challenges it faces and the opportunities that it presents itself with. We will spend around 50% of our bilateral ODA in Africa. I am not able to give commitments on the granularity of how programmes will be funded or, indeed, with regard to carry-overs, but as I have already said, we absolutely recognise the importance of research and development as a theme and Africa as a continent.
Roger Gale
Con
Herne Bay and Sandwich
Question
My right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh) was absolutely correct in pointing out that this represents a double cut: it is a cut from 0.7% to 0.5%, but it is also, of course, 0.5% of a lower figure, because gross national income has fallen. Can my right hon. Friend the Minister tell the House what effect that is going to have on the Ascend programme, what effect it will have on research into the treatment and prevention of malaria, and how many young women around the world will not receive education as a result of what I am afraid I have to regard as a breach of faith?
Minister reply
I am not able to provide my right hon. Friend with the level of detail that he has asked for at this stage. The thematic programmes that were set out in my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary’s written ministerial statement will now be worked out in more detail, and we will provide detail to our delivery partners as soon as we are able to, but I am not able to furnish the House with those figures at the moment.
Question
The rate of HIV infection remains stubbornly high—1.7 million people acquired HIV in 2019—and AIDS remains the leading killer of women of reproductive age. These are all preventable deaths. The UK’s most recent pledge to the Global Fund, in 2019, saved 2 million lives. The proposed cut to global health spending is 40%; if passed on to HIV funding, that is 800,000 lives. Can the Minister confirm that there will be no cuts to the Robert Carr Fund, the Global Fund, UNAIDS or HIV research—including on a vaccine, which we are now very close to—and that we will renew and fully meet, without delay, all those pledges that we have made to save those lives?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman makes the important point that while the attention of the world is rightly focused on coronavirus, that is not the only significant health issue facing the world. Unfortunately, as I said in my previous answer, I am not able to give assurances on individual programmes at this stage. The detail that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary set out in his written ministerial statement is available to Members online, and we will be providing further details as our teams, both in country and thematically, work through the next stages of the programme.
Question
My right hon. Friend is fully aware of the excellent work undertaken by arm’s length bodies such as the British Council in fostering better understanding and relations with other countries. We are indeed a soft power superpower. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that these ODA reductions do not lead to decisions that will damage those bodies’ long-term effectiveness?
Minister reply
We are conscious of the potential long-term impacts of what we believe to be a one-off and hopefully short-term situation with regard to the economic impact of coronavirus. We will look carefully at the best use of taxpayers’ money to ensure that important delivery mechanisms can continue into the future.
Claire Hanna
SDLP
Belfast South and Mid Down
Question
The pandemic has set back progress in healthcare and education for many years, at a time when the Government are cutting aid for reasons that, again, have not been justified. The medical supplies that the UK is sending to India are welcome and vital, but the evidence is clear: long-term strategic support is key to building resilience and capacity, and to preventing future problems from doing the type of harm that we are now witnessing in India. Does the Minister recognise that aid cuts now—even if restored at some point in the future—are, at best, penny wise and pound foolish?
Minister reply
I have answered the broader question about our budget situation a number of times. The hon. Member is right that the resilience of our partner countries is an important factor, which we consider when we make the decisions that we have made.
Question
I know, through my work as the Prime Minister’s trade envoy to Angola and Zambia, of the excellent work of TradeMark East Africa in upgrading borders so that trade can take place more easily, thereby helping developing countries to move from aid to trade much more quickly. Will the Government therefore protect the budget of TradeMark East Africa for this excellent work?
Minister reply
Although I completely agree with my hon. Friend’s broader point about helping countries move to economic self-sufficiency, I cannot give assurances for individual projects at this time.
Southgate and Wood Green
Question
UNICEF says that we are facing a children’s rights crisis, so will the Minister tell us what steps he has taken to ensure that children are protected from the impact of these cuts and that the UK continues to support children who find themselves living in desperate situations?
Minister reply
As I have said before, the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and the Government as a whole take the plight of children around the world incredibly seriously. That is why we are so committed to education, particularly of girls, which has been prioritised in our planning of this process.
Question
I have visited many successful UK aid-funded programmes, so I am disappointed by the proposed cuts to our aid budget. The Minister has confirmed that economic development is a priority for the Foreign Secretary, so does he agree that in order to help countries trade out of poverty and to deliver a truly global Britain, we must continue to fund aid for trade ODA programmes that help the poorest people in the world and enhance our mutual prosperity.
Minister reply
Although humanitarian issues will always remain a priority, the Government have ensured that we still spend some ODA money on the resilience and strengthening of the underlying economies of a number of countries around the world, addressing the very point that my hon. Friend makes.
Question
The Scottish National party has committed to increase aid spending by 50% next year if back in government, despite the constraints imposed by Westminster. With the worldwide pandemic, COP26 to come and loss and damage to be discussed, it is ridiculous that the UK Government are cutting aid. Did the Minister fight his corner to protect the ODA budget, or does he not care enough about the poorest and most vulnerable?
Minister reply
I, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, the Prime Minister, every Minister in this Government, and, I have no doubt, every Conservative Member, are absolutely passionate about support for the poorest people in the world. I am glad that the hon. Member’s party has chosen to be so generous. It is Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland working together—as a globally renowned Union—that enables his Government to be generous overseas. I am proud of the fact that our strong Union relationship allows them to do so.
Shadow Comment
Andrew Mitchell
Shadow Comment
The shadow criticises the Government for cutting aid in contrast with increased spending by Germany, France, and the US, undermining key allies like Jordan and Mali, and derailing promises on girls’ education. Cutting £500 million in humanitarian aid will affect millions of women and children globally. The decision is seen as politically motivated rather than economically necessary, shaming the country.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.