Noted the debate will be opened by Sarah Champion as Chair of the International Development Committee.

Advocated for maintaining DFID's integrity and its core focus on poverty alleviation, emphasising that aid should not be tied to political pressures. Highlighted the importance of scrutiny mechanisms such as the International Development Committee and Independent Commission for Aid Impact. Provided statistics detailing UK aid’s significant impact in areas like humanitarian assistance, immunization, education support, and water access. Warned against potential risks associated with merging DFID into FCDO without proper oversight.

Agreed with Sarah Champion's remarks, asserting that the merger can be executed in a manner that aligns British foreign policy and aid efforts. He argued for maintaining DFID’s culture to ensure continued effectiveness.

Agreed with Thomas Tugendhat's comments, stressing the necessity of proper parliamentary scrutiny over UK aid spending funded by British taxpayers.

Supports ICAI and argues that every penny of the international development budget is spent in Britain's national interest.

Reiterates the importance of prioritising British national interests through foreign aid. Emphasises the need for a merger of equals and highlights the potential benefits of integrating DFID with the Foreign Office.

Welcomes the debate but expresses concerns over the timing and impact on DFID staff. Questions the consultation process and the future role of the International Development Committee.

Welcomes the merger and recommitment to 0.7% aid target. Acknowledges DFID's effective spending practices and calls for better aid spending across all government departments.

The Prime Minister's decision to scrap DFID is a damning indictment of his lack of consultation with aid organisations and undermines public trust in Parliament. It will have a massive impact on the world's poorest communities and must be clarified immediately.

The merger of DFID and FCO is an opportunity to reaffirm Britain’s role as a compassionate, ambitious leader on the global stage. Britain can be proud of its development work in education, child health, and ending preventable child deaths. It is crucial that the new Department continues the important work done by DFID in safeguarding against sexual exploitation and abuse.

The proposed merger of FCO and DFID is seen as a cause for concern by constituents, fearing it will dilute UK aid towards reducing poverty and inequality. The goal is to prevent the conflation of development need with diplomatic self-interest.

Responding to the SNP's concerns about merging DFID into the Foreign Office, David Mundell references a Scottish Government White Paper that recommended placing an international development department within foreign affairs in the context of potential independence.

Argues that merging DFID into FCO could undermine the effectiveness of aid distribution, leading to a focus on security, trade or defence agendas rather than poverty reduction. He calls for departmental plans and strategies to be clear about aid goals and for stricter scrutiny from the Select Committee and Independent Commission for Aid Impact.

Noted that time constraints would limit future speakers' contributions. Called on Laurence Robertson to speak next.

Expresses mixed feelings about the merger, acknowledging the Government’s aim of serving British interests but arguing that poverty reduction programmes are inherently in UK's interest. Criticises the Prime Minister's statement regarding aid distribution and highlights the complexity of providing aid to countries with poor governance.

Highlights the importance of maintaining the 0.7% ODA floor as outlined in the Conservative manifesto, criticises the lack of consultation and the potential cuts in aid spending. Raises concerns about the impact on DFID staff morale.

Strongly opposes the decision to merge DFID into FCO, citing it as a mistake that will harm Britain's international reputation and effectiveness in development work. Expresses concern over potential changes to OECD rules on aid.

I urge the Government to focus on ensuring a whole-of-Government approach to the spending of development money, emphasising the quality of spend and the importance of ICAI's role in holding to account the quality of spending. It is crucial to drive up the quality of ODA spend across government departments due to their varying skills in managing funds.

The merger will almost certainly end Britain’s ring-fenced £15 billion aid budget, and it is incredibly poor timing given the global pandemic. The merger would be catastrophic on many levels, leading to a reversal of progress made since DFID was established in 1997. Multiple former Prime Ministers have criticised this move as a mistake that will result in less expertise and respect for the UK overseas.

There is a commitment to poverty eradication and aid effectiveness. Since 2015, DFID has seen 50.6 million women and girls reached by the UK’s nutrition programme. It is essential that this commitment continues post-merger. There are also commitments to accountability, transparency and scrutiny, keeping a Committee that scrutinises ODA spending and the Department's responsibility to ICAI.

Congratulates the hon. Member for Rotherham on securing this debate; expresses concern about cuts to official development assistance and lack of clarity in criteria for making such cuts; criticises the merger between DFID and FCDO, arguing it lacks transparency and accountability; emphasises the importance of maintaining expertise within DFID; raises concerns about safeguarding measures in aid programmes; calls for commitment to spending at least 50% of aid budget on the most vulnerable countries.

Welcomes joint roles she held as Minister for Africa and within DFID, arguing they were valuable; seeks three reassurances from the Government: a strong voice at Cabinet for the poorest in the world; continuation of spending most aid budget on the very poorest and conflict-affected regions; emphasis on girls' education to increase economic size, health, reduce poverty and benefit climate.

Supports scrutiny in this matter; suggests having a Chief Secretary of International Development and a permanent secretary for international development within the new FCDO; highlights importance of DFID's role in arms export control process to ensure aid recipients do not misuse funds on military equipment; raises concerns about future representation of humanitarian perspective in Committees on Arms Export Controls (CAEC) due to dissolution of International Development Committee.

Disappointed by the merger of DFID with the Foreign Office, highlighting DFID's commitment to reducing poverty and its role in humanitarian support. Emphasised the importance of maintaining the 0.7% aid budget commitment and called for the protection of fair trade initiatives.

Critiqued the merger as a waste of resources and questioned the government's values in prioritising national security over development. Highlighted DFID's effectiveness and its role under Labour, but expressed concern about the gradual reduction of its role.

Acknowledged scepticism towards the merger but proposed harnessing knowledge and experience for better aid delivery. Advocated for continued oversight by ICAI and IDC, suggesting quarterly meetings between committees to discuss projects.

Welcomed the merger and maintained commitment to international aid at 0.7%. Emphasised the importance of soft power and effective use of aid money, citing Norway, Denmark, and France as models for integrated foreign policy.

Commends the hon. Member for Rotherham on securing the debate and acknowledges Clare Short's work as the first Secretary of State for International Development. Criticises those who oppose international aid, highlighting the benefits of investing in other countries facing challenges. Requests additional development money for the Maldives due to their current difficulties with coronavirus and tuna tariffs, and also supports giving more aid to the Philippines.

Congratulates the hon. Member for Rotherham on calling the debate and discusses the need for a national strategy council to look five and 10 years ahead at potential problems such as pandemics, nation state behaviour, and climate change. Calls for an audit of overseas spending across various Departments including DFID, BEIS, Home Office, and Foreign Office to ensure effective use of resources.

Pays tribute to former Prime Ministers who supported the effort to tackle global poverty through DFID's work. Criticises plans to downsize or blur boundaries of DFID, emphasising the importance of maintaining focus on humanitarian support during the pandemic.

Welcomes commitment to 0.7% support but argues this is not the right time for organizational changes due to ongoing coronavirus pandemic in developing countries. Proposes a light-touch merger model as seen in Norway, emphasises need for local and adaptive aid agencies, and stresses importance of Cabinet-level representation.

Congratulates the Member for Rotherham on securing the debate. Expresses concern over the merger of DFID and Foreign Office without consultation, highlighting issues of aid transparency, clarity regarding poverty reduction commitments, and fears over the commitment to spending 0.7% of GNI on international aid. Calls for a long-term commitment from the Government to maintain transparency, direction, and influence in international aid.

Supports the bid by his party to secure this debate on the merger of DFID and Foreign Office. Emphasises the importance of debates on Government spending for scrutiny, criticising the Prime Minister's decision to break a 20 year cross-party consensus on aid. Opposes the merger entirely and calls for maintaining the legislative framework and expertise within DFID. Highlights the need for aid in tackling global challenges such as climate change and poverty.

The speaker criticises the decision to axe DFID, questioning whether the Prime Minister or Secretary of State misled Parliament about prior consultation. She highlights the pride British people have in DFID's humanitarian and development work over 23 years, citing numerous examples from other Members who support an independent DFID. The speaker argues that this decision is wasteful during a global pandemic, costing £50 million, and disregards voices from the global south and UK charities. She also emphasises that the process of merging will take at least two years to implement properly. Gill mentions historical scandals when aid was part of the Foreign Office and urges against returning to such practices. She stresses the need for long-term support from the UK in helping countries develop public health, education, and social protections during a deep global recession caused by the pandemic.

The Minister acknowledges the contributions made during the debate and reiterates the Government's commitment to maintaining the 0.7% of GNI for ODA. He emphasises that DFID, despite its romantic attachment among Labour Members, is a Department within the Conservative-led government and values its function, output, and impact on the world's poorest people. The Minister highlights the importance of safeguarding in international development work and the UK’s role as a global leader in this area. He discusses the integrated nature of the FCO and DFID functions, using the GAVI summit as an example to illustrate how relationships built with interlocutors around the world are used for successful international collaboration. The Minister assures that scrutiny is welcomed and that effective scrutiny will continue to be part of the FCDO's future operations. He reiterates the UK’s commitment to spending a significant portion of aid in fragile and conflict-affected states, noting the UK as one of the few countries dedicating 0.7% or more of GNI to ODA. The timing of the merger is justified, with the Prime Minister considering it right for bringing together ODA spending and diplomatic functions. He assures that DFID will merge equally with FCO without gobbling up its personnel or expertise.