Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

UK Aid Policy: Global Funding Trends

07 July 2026 · 16 other contributors · 13,062 words

Opened by David Mundell Con Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale

Responding minister: Chris Elmore

EconomyForeign Affairs

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

David Mundell raised concerns about uk aid policy: global funding trends in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • Speaker raises concerns over severe cuts to UK overseas aid budget
  • Speaker highlights impact of funding reductions on global health issues like Ebola
  • Speaker urges government to adopt recommendations from International Development Committee report

Key requests to Government

The speaker urges the new Government to adopt recommendations from the International Development Committee's report, focusing on effective interventions such as the Child Nutrition Fund, which provide value for money. He also calls for rebuilding public support for development by clearly explaining how aid impacts lives and economies positively.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

David Mundell Con Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale

The speaker is concerned about the depth and speed of cuts to the UK's overseas aid budget, noting that these reductions are more severe than those being implemented in the United States under the Trump administration. He highlights the impact on vulnerable communities globally, citing examples such as the spread of Ebola in the Democratic Republic of Congo due to funding reductions. The speaker also criticizes the concept of 'mainstreaming' in aid policy and advocates for a coherent long-term plan that aligns with UK interests while addressing budget realities.

Other contributors (16)
  • Andrew Mitchell Con Sutton Coldfield

    Andrew Mitchell acknowledged the importance of an all-party approach to development policy and praised the Government's recent conference for bringing together interested parties. He emphasised that despite cuts, Britain still spends a substantial amount on international aid which is doing significant good. Mitchell also expressed concern over Britain's reputation suffering due to severe budget cuts in international development.

  • Bambos Charalambous Lab Enfield, Southgate

    The right hon. Gentleman has talked about stretched budgets. Does he agree that we also need to address debt, because private debt is a big factor in preventing some low-income countries from investing in their health and education systems?

  • Beccy Cooper

    Expressed concern about potential 14 million additional deaths by 2030 due to cuts in international aid and discussed the importance of global health initiatives such as Gavi and the Global Fund. She highlighted concerns over antimicrobial resistance and the impact on public health systems, especially in Africa, noting a 56% reduction in bilateral aid to Africa.

  • Brian Mathew

    The hon. Member raises concerns about cuts to WASH sector aid, advocating for larger funds directed through multilateral channels to the poorest populations.

  • Ellie Chowns Lab Walthamstow

    Ms Chowns expressed shock at the Labour Government's significant cut to the UK aid budget, describing it as shocking and shameful. She highlighted that the reduction is short-sighted and immoral, leading to millions of preventable deaths globally. Emphasising her experience in international development, she cited examples from Malawi, Burundi, Uganda, and the Philippines to demonstrate how effective aid can be in saving lives and rebuilding communities. Ms Chowns criticised the redirection of funds towards defence spending, noting that it often ends up wasted on cancelled programmes. Ellie Chowns argues that lower-middle income countries have not requested the significant reduction in aid budgets implemented by the government and calls for changes to be made without cutting aid expenditure.

  • Gregory Campbell DUP East Londonderry

    Asked whether providing clean drinking water in sub-Saharan Africa is one of the most cost-effective ways to help local communities.

  • James Naish

    The right hon. Gentleman sits with me on the International Development Committee, so he will know as I do that, to date, the Committee has found that there is still no detail on how poverty alleviation is prioritised and tracked under the new model going from donor to investor. My hon. Friend expresses concern that reduced bilateral funding will weaken the UK's influence in multilateral organisations, urging appropriate resourcing for maximum leverage within these systems.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    The hon. Member welcomes the Minister to his place and expresses concern over the shrinking aid budget, advocating for a shift in focus towards aiding the poorest nations while cutting funding to countries capable of self-sufficiency. He suggests partnering with local missionaries and faith-based organisations for more efficient aid delivery. The right hon. Lady always makes incredibly important and helpful contributions. In my contribution, I suggested that there is another way of doing things, which is working alongside church groups and faith-based organisations. Does she feel that that is a possible way to spend money and have influence more wisely?

  • John Martin McDonnell Lab Hayes and Harlington

    The hon. Gentleman highlights that money from aid will go to defence, reducing the aid budget by £4.8 billion in 2026-27 and then £6.5 billion. He criticises the Ministry of Defence for wasting taxpayer funds on failed projects.

  • Lee Pitcher

    I am the chair of the water, sanitation and hygiene all-party parliamentary group and a big champion of WaterAid's "Time to Deliver" campaign. One million mums and babies lose their lives each year because of a lack of access to water during childbirth.

  • Melanie Ward Lab East Ham

    Melanie Ward highlights a visit to Syria where she led the first British parliamentary delegation since the fall of the Assad regime, discussing areas such as special educational needs and disabilities, with 27% of Syrian children being disabled due to the war. She asks if it is time for a new development partnership with Syria.

  • Monica Harding Lab Nottingham North

    The Government's aid cuts from 0.7% to 0.3% of GNI are the biggest in this century, amounting to a 50% cut in bilateral aid to Africa alone. These cuts have cost lives and worsened conditions in countries like Afghanistan and DRC, where health systems have been damaged. Monica Harding argues that these cuts undermine Britain's reputation on the global stage and reduce its influence.

  • Noah Law Con Birmingham Erdington

    Noah Law supported the government's shift from donor to investor mindset, highlighting three key areas for UK influence: global debt system reform, multilateral development banks and finance, and private sector investment mobilisation. He called for statutory measures in debt reform and urged the Minister to strengthen engagement with the London Coalition on common framework and term sheet improvements.

  • Steve Race

    Nutrition is foundational for development, and the UK has been a trusted global partner on nutrition for many years. In the context of the recent reduction in aid spending, supporting and developing innovative new mechanisms such as the Child Nutrition Fund is vital to reversing the trend of hunger, malnutrition and starvation while working in partnership with affected nations.

  • Tom Hayes Lab Nottingham North

    It feels to me that there is scope for the UK and European Union countries to work together more closely to tackle the rising global anti-rights movement. Given the progress in Hungary, it feels like there is an opportunity to start to push back on the age of impunity. The right hon. Gentleman highlighted the importance of protecting and preserving the narrative of Britain's positive impact on the world, suggesting that debates like this are opportunities to build on successes rather than engage in hand-wringing. Mr Hayes, commenting on international development support, acknowledged the need for growing public backing for aid funding. He pointed out a challenge in increasing domestic support and suggested that parliamentary leadership is crucial to address complacency regarding sustainable poverty alleviation funding.

  • Wendy Morton Con Aldridge-Brownhills

    Ms. Morton highlighted the current international landscape marked by conflict, instability, and strategic competition. She emphasized that Britain must ensure every pound spent overseas delivers maximum benefit for national security, prosperity, health, and recipients. She proposed reducing ODA to 0.1% of GNI and called for greater clarity on criteria determining value for money in development programmes. Morton also questioned the lack of practical changes since the Government's decision two years ago and urged for reforms within multilateral systems and bilateral partnerships. She further raised concerns about Sudan's humanitarian crisis, Ukrainian child abductions during the war, and the need for stronger accountability from organisations receiving UK support.

Government Response

Chris Elmore

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this morning, Mr Efford. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) for securing this debate. I thank all Members who have contributed and will do my best to respond to the points raised. Twenty years ago, many believed that globalisation, economic growth and international co-operation would steadily drive down poverty and expand opportunity across the world. That ambition remains as important today as it was then, but the world has changed dramatically. We are living through a period of geopolitical fragmentation, increasing conflict and economic uncertainty. The assumptions around development policy no longer hold, so we must adapt. Many traditional and significant donor countries have announced or are carrying out reductions to their official development assistance budgets. Global aid fell by 23% in 2025—the largest year-on-year reduction we have ever seen. As this House is aware, the Government made the difficult decision to reduce the UK ODA budget to fund a necessary increase in defence spending. That was a tough decision that many Members have talked about today, and not all Members agreed with it. I understand that, but it was the right decision given the threats our country faces. Constrained ODA, though, is only part of the story. That is clear when we look at Africa, where the annual financing gap—the difference between the investment Africa needs each year to deliver the sustainable development goals and the funding it can currently access—is around $1.3 trillion. In contrast, aid to sub-Saharan Africa totalled $66.5 billion in 2024. That gap demonstrates that traditional ODA flows have only ever amounted to a small fraction of what is actually needed. In other words, ODA can only be part of a solution, not the whole solution. Continuing to work in the same way and expecting different results is no longer defensible. Low-income and middle-income countries have been calling for change for some time. They want long-term genuine partnerships based on mutual respect and shared priorities, not paternalism. To reflect that new reality, we are modernising our approach to international development through four essential shifts: moving from donor to investor; from service delivery to support systems; from grants to expertise; and from international intervention to local leadership. We will prioritise multilateral organisations in the ODA budget where the international system is required to deliver at scale and with legitimacy, including the World Bank's International Development Association and the African Development Fund. The UK remains a steadfast global leader in the global HIV response, having pledged £850 million for the Global Fund and supporting an effective transition of UNAIDS that protects essential functions. We are also investing in innovation to expand access to new long-acting HIV prevention and treatment technologies. Meanwhile, we prioritise our bilateral support for countries and communities with the highest humanitarian need, committing £1.4 billion a year over the next three years, fully protecting budgets for Ukraine, Sudan, Palestine, and Lebanon during crisis periods. In conclusion, in May, the UK hosted the Global Partnerships Conference that brought together participants from Governments, multilateral organisations, business, tech, philanthropy, and civil society to discuss genuine partnership as the basis for our modern development approach.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy