Future of UK aid and development assistance: interim report

Introduction

1. The world is at a crossroads in how it perceives and tackles its development challenges. The cuts to Official Development Assistance (ODA) in many countries (not least our own) pose pressing questions about why and how higher-income countries support lower-income countries facing humanitarian crises, chronic poverty, and striving to meet longer term development aspirations.

2. We are supportive of the Government’s ambition to wrestle with these questions rather than simply trying to continue the same activities with less money. The Government affirms commitment that the reduction to 0.3% of Gross National Income (GNI), down from 0.5%, spent on ODA will be phased, with the worst damage being mitigated.

3. However, we consider the Government’s phased reduction of ODA and structural changes to the FCDO to be in conflict with its long established commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI on ODA. FCDO 2030 is the name given to the FCDO’s programme of structural and staffing changes. It anticipates a reduction of staffing of between 15 and 25%.¹ There is a significant risk that these cuts, likely to include a reduction in experts in the FCDO, could irredeemably undermine the department’s ability to deliver transparent and effective programming. They would limit the ability to respond to the needs of the UK’s partners and of the extreme poor. The current trend of protracted conflicts represents growing need, with ripple effects across the world.

4. We have good reason to consider the pace of change within the FCDO to be too rapid and that irrevocable changes will be made imminently. For this reason, we have produced an interim report, with the intention of informing decisions being taken. Specifically, this interim report addresses the drastic changes to staffing currently underway, and the multi-year spending plans being finalised.

5. This interim report draws on the evidence that the Committee has taken over the course of this Parliament, including evidence received for this inquiry. Over the past 18 months, we have heard from inspirational community leaders and grass-roots development workers; leading academics; cutting-edge NGOs; businesses and investors; and courageous volunteers. Our report draws on all these voices as well as the 196 written responses to this inquiry from international organisations based in the UK, local organisations in lower-income countries, private companies, academics and members of the public. We thank all those who contributed for their valuable insights.

Government direction and pace of change

6. We are encouraged that Baroness Chapman, the Minister responsible for international development, still sees poverty reduction as the core aim of UK ODA and the influence that this brings the UK as a secondary aim. However, there is much work to do to ensure that this ambition can be protected. The Government’s commitment to value for money is laudable. However, it risks making key decisions that could undermine its ability to achieve this, both for the intended recipients and the UK taxpayer.

Multilaterals: an unknown quantity?

7. The Development Minister confirmed, on 20 January, that there was a shift in the proportion of UK ODA being channelled through multilateral organisations.² The Committee recognises the Government’s logic in channelling resources through multilateral organisations. We have heard strong arguments that many multilateral mechanisms provide excellent value for money, where used strategically.³ They can leverage private finance, gain access to difficult-to-reach areas, and have unique surge capacity—maximising the benefits to those living in poverty or facing crisis.

8. We agree with the Government that multilateral agencies and the systems they operate in need urgent reform. Primarily, the reforms needed relate to ensuring the voices from lower-income countries are represented in decision making;⁴ that multilateral agencies are held accountable to all stakeholders;⁵ and they represent value for money. This should include a focus on impact and reducing overheads to ensure more in-country spend with wider positive effects on local economies.

9. On the other hand, we are unconvinced that the Government, on the brink of designating a larger share of ODA to multilateral programmes, has considered how it will address the challenges associated with a more hands-off approach to programming decisions.⁶

10. The first challenge is around influence. The Government has indicated some strong guiding principles for how its partnerships will be shaped. For example, it intends to shift towards supporting systems and local leadership.⁷ It is not clear whether the Government will ensure similar principles are adopted by the multilateral programmes and bodies that the UK is supporting.⁸

14. The second challenge is that some multilateral organisations are clearer than others when it comes to demonstrating how ODA money is spent. Multilateral organisations need to be as accountable to the UK Government, scrutiny bodies and civil society as bilateral programmes. This is something we have heard is notoriously difficult.⁹ The Government has admitted that there is currently no plan for communicating the work of multilateral organisations to the public.^{10 11} A shift away from bilateral programming is also a concern the UK’s bilateral partners.

15. While the UK may mitigate the loss of tangible bilateral support programmes by reminding partner governments of its contribution to multilateral spend, such nuances will not reach the general population. There is a risk that redirection of funds to multilaterals will simply be seen as the UK having withdrawn from the country.

18. Finally, we agree with the Government that influence within multilateral organisations and the multilateral system requires an appropriate level of financial buy-in.¹² However, it also relies on the UK remaining a respected thought-leader on the approaches that multilaterals take to solving relief and development challenges. This requires investment in the staffing of the FCDO both centrally and at country level.¹³ The FCDO 2030 programme, which anticipates staffing cuts of between 15–25%,¹⁴ raises questions over the commitment of the department to this objective.

Bilateral funding and meaningful partnership—putting its money where its mouth is

21. We note the Government’s commitment to partnership over paternalism when working with lower-income countries to achieve development goals. Equitable partnerships rely on mutual respect. This respect must be earned through willingness to apply resources in line with the priorities of partners.¹⁵

22. The Committee has witnessed time and time again how a relatively small amount of investment in expert staffing, catalytic bilateral programmes, civil society and strategic Government relationships in-country can bring about significant change in the fight against poverty. Expectations around the nature of bilateral support, and its impact, needs to be gauged based on the capacity of governance in any given country. The Committee was not presented with any evidence that this has taken place in advance of the spending and structural decisions being made. However, with diminishing budgets and staffing complement, there is a risk that the ability and autonomy to respond to the needs identified could be limited.¹⁶

23. The Government has outlined four essential shifts in its country development partnerships:

• from donor to investor;
• from service delivery to system support;
• from grants to expertise;
• from international intervention to local leadership.¹⁷

For the shifts to be successfully implemented bilaterally, sufficient resources will need to be available. For example, the Government has made commitments to champion local leadership at Government and civil society level. This is likely to require significant investment to ensure that accountability and impact measurement expectations are both rigorous and accessible for local actors.¹⁸ We also heard that the shift toward promoting investment will require particular skills.¹⁹

Structures and staffing fit for purpose

29. We were encouraged by the Development Minister’s ambition that the primary aim of ODA should remain focussed on reducing poverty. We also agree that there are advantages in considering how the range of the FCDO’s activities and work areas can contribute to its relief and development objectives. However, we have concerns that the revised structure of the directorates within the FCDO may make it easier for poverty reduction to be deprioritised, and the impact of ODA spend on poverty reduction harder to track.^{20 21}

31. Despite reassurances from the Development Minister, we have significant concerns that the speed and sequencing of the restructure.²² Crucial structural and staffing decisions are being made before certainty around budgets and policy.^{23 24} This is not only highly traumatic for the department workforce, but also risks the loss of key staff needed to deliver the Government’s vision for ODA.^{25 26}

Independent scrutiny of UK ODA

34. Independent scrutiny is central to ensure public confidence and partner accountability in UK ODA spending.²⁷ It is the Committee’s experience that the Independent Commission on Aid Impact (ICAI) has consistently performed its functions in an exemplary way and provided good value for money. In absence of evidence to the contrary, we disagree with the Development Minister’s assessment that the ICAI has not achieved its objectives around public confidence.²⁸ It is the Government’s role to communicate the value of UK aid to the public.

Multi-year spending allocations

38. Within the next few weeks, the department will announce the next phase of spending plans as it moves to reducing ODA to 0.3% of GNI. As the FCDO considers its priorities, local empowerment²⁹ needs to be at the core of its theory of change, and its sights need to be zeroed on where the need is the greatest.³⁰ Preventative work in fragile and conflict-affected states, and those most vulnerable to climate change, will be fundamental to averting larger humanitarian crises as well as reducing the drivers of irregular migration.³¹ Resource decisions being made currently must be prioritised accordingly.³²

40. This work will need to be fully integrated with the UK’s commitments as part of the Women Peace and Security agenda, and its work on preventing sexual violence against women and girls.³³ The rights of women and girls are being contested and weaponised against civil society.³⁴ This so-called “anti-rights” rhetoric is also being used to undermine the UK’s reputation by its adversaries.³⁵ In addition, progress on the inclusion of disabled people and older people is at risk of regressing as sensitive and specific funding is being sidelined.³⁶ We agree with the FCDO Director of General, Humanitarian and Development, that making sure that “programmes are following through [ … ] thoroughly” on the Government’s international statements is important.³⁷

Conclusions and recommendations

Government direction and pace of change

1. The Government plans to spend a greater proportion of its shrinking ODA pot through multilateral institutions. There is logic to this, but the Government is yet to set out how it will ensure that its multilateral programme spending is used in line with its principles for ODA spend. (Conclusion, Paragraph 11)

2. A multilateral development review is urgently needed to underpin the change in proportion of ODA spent through this channel. The Government needs a clear understanding of its current commitments and the performance of multilateral organisations it supports. (Conclusion, Paragraph 12)

3. The Government should commission a multilateral development review to consider and report on the performance of the organisations it supports, before the end of 2026. (Recommendation, Paragraph 13)

4. It is the responsibility of the Government to remain accountable to the public, principally through Parliament, on how ODA is spent. However, it is also morally obliged to be accountable to those receiving UK ODA and their governments. We agree with the Development Minister that ODA should not be seen as simply a tool for increasing the influence of the UK. However, in a contested world, the UK cannot allow any misunderstanding about its commitment to its bilateral partners which could give its adversaries a foothold. Moreover, as the Government recognises, the UK’s diplomatic capital allows it to affect changes that dramatically improve the lives of the poor. This leverage must not be diminished through weak communications over the UK’s financial commitments or lack of oversight over programmes it funds. The Committee see the value of UK soft power in promoting human rights, democracy and the rule-based international order. The UK can and should be unashamed to promote its values, language, and culture in a world where significant powers, who do not share our values, are expanding their influence. (Conclusion, Paragraph 16)

5. To improve communication and transparency around multilateral spend, we recommend that:

a. the Government works with multilateral partners on a communication plan which will convey to bilateral partners and the UK public the work that the UK Government supports;

b. the FCDO takes urgent steps to improve the accessibility of data on multilateral programming available to the aid sector and the public. (Recommendation, Paragraph 17)

6. To be effective, the Government’s aspiration to spend ODA more efficiently through a reformed multilateral system requires two things: influence and expertise. Both require money that is well targeted and accountable. The Government has not provided adequate reassurance that the internal resources needed to maintain this influence and expertise have been safeguarded. (Conclusion, Paragraph 19)

7. We urge the Government to fully assess requirements for the staffing required to oversee and support reform of the UK’s multilateral partners by an upfront skills audit focussed on what is needed to support a future aid landscape. Steps should be taken to ensure that this capacity is retained and built upon under the FCDO 2030 restructuring programme. (Recommendation, Paragraph 20)

8. The FCDO has an impressive and nuanced understanding of situations on-the-ground through its overseas network and local staff. As part of the next round of spending decisions, in-country missions must have the autonomy needed to spend ODA within the Government’s wider development policy framework. (Conclusion, Paragraph 24)

9. To enable the FCDO to provide relevant and impactful support in its bilateral partner countries:

a. sufficient levels of bilateral ODA must be earmarked for programmes, the design and delivery of which would be overseen by the FCDO (and other delivery departments) in-country;

b. Centrally Managed Programmes (CMPs) need to undergo a thorough review to ensure that central oversight is providing the best value for money. Missions must have the structures and independence to approve CMPs based on their own strategic priorities and understanding of the local development context. They must also have the freedom and expertise to assess the impact of CMPs, requiring intentional communication with the programme managers. (Recommendation, Paragraph 25)

10. Where missions across a region, or a thematic area, have identified shared opportunities and solutions, collaboration should be encouraged. Supporting such initiatives will be an efficient use of limited funds as well as a good utilisation of expertise, whether in the region or in the UK. (Conclusion, Paragraph 26)

11. Badly designed and delivered development and humanitarian assistance is bad for the UK. It carries risks to those it is designed to serve and reputational risks to the UK Government. (Conclusion, Paragraph 27)

12. Missions must, therefore, have access to in-house expertise both on the ground and in the UK. This expertise needs to cover both thematic issues relating to poverty alleviation, as well as the geographic knowledge of specific contexts. Local staff are absolutely vital for achieving effective projects that represent value for money. (Recommendation, Paragraph 28)

13. We request that, in its response to this report, the Government provides details on how it intends to prioritise poverty reduction as it restructures the department. (Recommendation, Paragraph 30)

14. We reiterate our previous concerns around the sequencing and speed of the FCDO 2030 programme. (Conclusion, Paragraph 32)

15. We call on the Government to pause the processes currently underway until the following actions have been completed:

a. a structured assessment of staffing required to deliver the Government’s priorities both in the UK and in countries with a diplomatic mission, to be presented in a Workforce Plan for this spending review period;

b. a thorough skills audit and an equalities impact assessment to support and inform the Workforce Plan;

c. an assessment of the impact of the ODA programming decisions on the extreme poor, as well as the UK’s ability to lead diplomatically on key issues impacting them. (Recommendation, Paragraph 33)

16. The existence and adequate resourcing of the Independent Commission on Aid Impact sends a powerful message to all stakeholders that the UK takes transparency and value for money seriously. We are alarmed by apparent misunderstanding of the ICAI’s distinct role by the Development Minister. (Conclusion, Paragraph 35)

17. Whilst we agree that the value for money of every aspect of Government spending must be assessed, we caution against any rapid decision-making with regards to the ICAI’s future. Full funding should remain in place until a final decision made—a decision based on an assessment of the existing arrangements compared against other options. (Recommendation, Paragraph 36)

18. As its Parliamentary oversight body, this Committee must be kept fully appraised of the Government’s work and decision-making around ICAI’s future. (Recommendation, Paragraph 37)

19. In the coming years, the greatest need will be in fragile and conflict-affected states, and states most vulnerable to climate change. Working in partnership to address these needs mutually benefits the affected countries and the UK. The empowerment and equipping of these states, and their civil society organisations, should be central to the FCDO’s approach. Resourcing decisions for ODA by the Government in the coming weeks and months need to accurately reflect where the greatest need is. They also need to reflect where preventative action is likely to have the greatest impact. (Conclusion, Paragraph 39)

20. Upholding the rights of marginalised groups, as well as realising the potential of women and girls in both achieving societal resilience and poverty reduction, should be strategic priorities for UK ODA. This must be reflected in the spending allocations. (Conclusion, Paragraph 41)

21. The FCDO must have the expertise and resources required to empower marginalised groups in decision-making forums, as well as the ability to equip them in their efforts to bring about lasting change in their communities. The FCDO will need to ensure that, through its spending allocations, it retains centralised and local gender expertise. It will also need gender-specific bilateral funding to achieve its aims. (Recommendation, Paragraph 42)

22. The Government’s focusses on global health, and climate and nature are welcome. However, the Government must maintain the flexibility within these priorities to accommodate the interconnectedness of development challenges. It also needs the flexibility to be able to respond to needs expressed by its bilateral partners in governments and civil society. This is particularly important in fragile and conflict-affected states. (Conclusion, Paragraph 43)

23. We urge the Government to consider the nature of interconnected challenges such as nutrition, food systems, education, Water Sanitation and Hygiene, and governance challenges—particularly in relation to fragile and conflict-affected states—as it plans how it will deploy its financial and human resources in a holistic way over this spending period. (Recommendation, Paragraph 44)

Formal minutes

Tuesday 3 February 2026

Members present:

Sarah Champion, in the Chair

Tracy Gilbert

Monica Harding

David Mundell

James Naish

Sam Rushworth

David Taylor

Future of UK aid and development assistance: interim report

Draft Report (Future of UK aid and development assistance: interim report), proposed by the Chair, brought up and read.

Ordered, That the draft Report be read a second time, paragraph by paragraph.

Paragraphs 1 to 44 read and agreed to.

Resolved, That the Report be the Ninth Report of the Committee to the House.

Ordered, That the Chair make the Report to the House.

Ordered, That embargoed copies of the Report be made available (Standing Order No. 134).

Adjournment

[Adjourned till Tuesday 10 February at 1.30 p.m.]

Witnesses

The following witnesses gave evidence. Transcripts can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.

Tuesday 25 November 2025

Martin John, National Officer, Public and Commercial Services (PCS) trade union; Lois Austin, FCDO Group Secretary, Public and Commercial Services (PCS) trade unionQ1–68

Professor Emma Mawdsley, Professor of Geography and Development Studies, University of Cambridge; Gideon Rabinowitz, Director of Policy and Advocacy, Bond; Freddie Carver, Director, Humanitarian Policy Group, ODI Global; Anna Schuesterl, Director of Communications, ODI GlobalQ69–99

Tuesday 20 January 2026

The Rt Hon. the Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State for International Development and Africa, Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office; Melinda Bohannon, Director General, Humanitarian and Development, Foreign, Commonwealth & Development OfficeQ100–193

Tuesday 27 January 2026

Sapphire Alexander, Founder, Caribbean Feminist (Trinidad and Tobago); Chido Govera, Founder, Future of Hope Foundation (Zimbabwe); Finian Ali, Youth Coordinator, Scaling Up Nutrition Network (Nigeria)Q194–209

Bel Trew, Chief International Correspondent, The Independent; Luke Tryl, Executive Director, UK, More in Common; Professor Jennifer Hudson, Director, Development Engagement LabQ209–233

Published written evidence

The following written evidence was received and can be viewed on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website.

UKA numbers are generated by the evidence processing system and so may not be complete.

1 Asset Green Ltd UKA0140

2 Access to Medicines Initiative UKA0105

3 Ackers, Dr Jim (Submitter) UKA0213

4 Action Against Hunger UK UKA0184

5 Action Through Enterprise UKA0215

6 Action for Global Health UKA0199

7 Action for Sustainable Development UKA0029

8 ActionAid UK UKA0099

9 Adam Smith International UKA0207

10 Adams, Grace (CEO, Effective Altruism Australia) UKA0061

11 Afghanistan and Central Asian Association (ACAA) UKA0125

12 AgDevCo Ltd UKA0067

13 Age International UKA0080

14 Alexander, Aidan (Entrepreneur, FarmKind) UKA0107

15 Alliance for Reducing Antimicrobial Resistance UKA0180

16 Ambitious Impact UKA0163

17 Arvidsson, Judit (Student , Durham University) UKA0104

18 Association for Development and Diplomacy UKA0216

19 Automation Builders Club UKA0158

20 BBC Media Action UKA0167

21 BDO LLP UKA0114

22 Binego, Dr Liliane (Researcher, Coventry University); and Wright, Dr Julia (Associate Professor, Coventry University) UKA0085

23 Bond Disability and Development Group UKA0187

24 BURN Manufacturing UKA0191

25 Banu, Habiba (Director, Spiro) UKA0115

26 Blue Ventures Conservation UKA0190

27 Bond UKA0177

28 Bourn, Professor Douglas (Professor of Development Education, University College London- Development Education Research Centre) UKA0090

29 British Expertise International UKA0146

30 Buckley, Mike UKA0182

31 Burma Campaign UK UKA0135

32 Buziuk, Hleb (Independent policy researcher and human-rights advocate, FairGo CIC) UKA0038

33 CAFOD UKA0174

34 CARE International UK UKA0165

35 CBM UK (Global Disability Inclusion) UKA0063

36 CGIAR UKA0129

37 Caplan, Theo UKA0131

38 Cash, Dr Daniel (Associate Professor, Aston University) UKA0004

39 Catalyst Now UKA0014

40 Celebi, Dr Dilek (Lecturer, Bingol University) UKA0039

41 Center for Global Development UKA0157

42 Chaikovska, Miss Alla (Student, University of Bath); Singh, Miss Ayda (Student, University of Bath); and Amey, Mr Harri (Student, University of Bath) UKA0173

43 Chatham House UKA0168

44 Chatterton, Mr Brian (Farmer, Podere valle Pulcini) UKA0073

45 Christian Aid UKA0026

46 Cianforlini, Matteo (PhD Candidate, University of Bologna) UKA0003

47 Coalition for Global Prosperity UKA0076

48 Concern Worldwide UK UKA0027

49 Conservation International UK; Campaign for Nature; Fauna & Flora; RSPB; The Nature Conservancy; WWF-UK; and Zoological Society of London (ZSL) UKA0036

50 Copestake, Dr James (Professor of International Development, University of Bath) UKA0094

51 Daniels, Thomas (Co-Executive Director, LABRI) UKA0088

52 Danish Refugee Council UKA0126

53 Deaf Child Worldwide UKA0020

54 Debt Justice UKA0051

55 Demeshko, Anastassia (Tom Drake, Senior Policy Analyst, Global Health Policy Programme, Center for Global Development (now Health Economics Lead at the Wellcome Trust), Anastassia Demeshko, Research Assistant, Global Health Policy Programme, Center for Global Development & Pete Baker, Deputy Director & Policy Fellow, Global Health Policy Programme, Center for Global Development) UKA0166

56 Development Engagement Lab UKA0018

57 Dixon, Miss Lisa (Medical Student, University of Cambridge) UKA0043

58 Drummond, Brian (Researcher, Independent) UKA0035

59 Ecorys UK Limited UKA0123

60 Eleanor Crook Foundation UKA0087

61 Elevate Philanthropy UKA0044

62 Engaging Climate Ltd UKA0200

63 Environmental Investigation Agency UKA0151

64 FSD Africa UKA0169

65 Fairtrade Foundation UKA0023

66 Fazlan, Umar (AI Safety Officer, Effective Altruism Manchester) UKA0062

67 Field, Mr Arthur UKA0047

68 Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office UKA0196

69 Foreign Policy Centre UKA0209

70 Foroughi, Dr Hamid (Associate Professor of Responsible Management, University of Warwick); and Mahad, Miss Waris (former research assistant, University of Warwick) UKA0130

71 GADN Humanitarian Working Group UKA0186

72 GSK and ViiV Healthcare UKA0103

73 Gavi the Vaccine Alliance UKA0155

74 Gender and Development Network (GADN) UKA0095

75 Ghosal, Professor Sayantan (Adam Smith Chair in Political Economy , University of Glasgow) UKA0137

76 Global Alliance on Health and Pollution (GHAP) UKA0204

77 Global Cooperation / Kooperation Global UKA0149

78 Global Forum for Media Development (GFMD) UKA0142

79 Global Greengrants Fund UK UKA0153

80 Global Partners Governance UKA0208

81 Global Public Investment Network UKA0092

82 Goodman, Matthew UKA0057

83 Holliday, Jamie (Student, Edge Hill University); Parker, Louie (Student, Edge Hill University); Blackburn, Isaac (Student, Edge Hill University); and Hansen, Henrik (Student, Edge Hill University) UKA0012

84 Humanitarian Finance Forum UKA0164

85 Humanitarian Learning Centre (HLC), Institute of Development Studies (IDS) UKA0098

86 Hyde, Byron (Academic, Bangor University) UKA0171

87 IFES UKA0025

88 Impact Global Health UKA0128

89 Independent Commission for Aid Impact UKA0212

90 Institute of Development Studies UKA0068

91 International Centre for Tax and Development UKA0030

92 International Committee of the Red Cross ICRC UKA0189

93 International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) UKA0089

94 International Organization for Migration UKA0083

95 International Planned Parenthood Federation UKA0141

96 International Rescue Committee UKA0117

97 Jagannath Growers UKA0064

98 Jacobstein, Mr. David; and Guerzovich, Dr. Florencia UKA0106

99 Jain, Mr Vikram (Student, University College London) UKA0070

100 Juma, Mr Lawrence (Head of Program Design & Organizational Scaling, Oxygen Access Project) UKA0120

101 Kathleen, Dr (Associate Professor , LSHTM) UKA0024

102 Kashyap, Dr Megha (Decolonising Research Fellow, London South Bank University); and Divedi, Ipsita (Researcher, Freelance) UKA0005

103 Kelly, Dr Paul Richard (Associate Proessor / Lecturer in Organisation Studies, University of Essex) UKA0052

104 Kim, Dr Youngmi (Senior Lecturer, University of Edinburgh); Fumagalli, Dr Matteo (Senior Lecturer, University of St Andrews); Ko Ko, Mr Aung (Executive Director, Mosaic Myanmar); and Thalay Pay, Ms Naw Grace (Programme Assistant, Mosaic Myanmar) UKA0178

105 Kivu International UKA0108

106 Langsikt - Centre for Long-Term Policy UKA0203

107 Lazell, Dr Melita (Associate Professor in Political Economy and Development, University of Portsmouth); and Petrikova, Dr Ivica (Associate Professor in International Relations, Royal Holloway, University of London) UKA0139

108 Leonard, Alycia (Senior Research Associate, University of Oxford); Sánchez-Lopez, Miguel (Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Oxford); and Hirmer, Stephanie (Associate Professor, University of Oxford) UKA0101

109 Li, Dr Jie Sheng UKA0002

110 Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine UKA0210

111 London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine UKA0010

112 Long, Dr Graham (Senior Lecturer, Newcastle University) UKA0033

113 Loop Pet Food UKA0109

114 Lowrie, Mr John (Retired Human Rights and Development Worker, Nomad RSI (my last NGO)) UKA0001

115 M&C Saatchi World Services UKA0111

116 MIFUMI UKA0113

117 Maestral International UKA0172

118 Malaria No More UK UKA0081

119 Mattock, Nathan (Automation Engineer, London Based Startup) UKA0058

120 McArdle, Dr Scarlett (Assistant Professor in Law, University of Nottingham) UKA0143

121 McKay, Dr Gillian UKA0112

122 Medicines for Malaria Venture (MMV) UKA0022

123 Melvin, Dr Jennifer (Guest Teacher in International Development, Department of International Development, London School of Economics) UKA0192

124 Mercy Corps UKA0049

125 Miltin, Professor Diana (Professor of Global Urbanism, The University of Manchester) UKA0007

126 More in Common UKA0170

127 Morlino, Dr Irene (Visiting Fellow in International Relations , London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)) UKA0097

128 Mosaic Middle East and Papua Partners UKA0015

129 Muslim Charities Forum UKA0179

130 Mèdecins Sans Frontiëres UKA0011

131 NGO Forest Coalition UKA0214

132 NIHR Global Surgery Unit UKA0144

133 Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) UK UKA0150

134 ODI Global UKA0185

135 Oxfam GB UKA0078

136 Oxford Policy Management UKA0160

137 PEAS (Promoting Equality in African Schools) UKA0054

138 Palladium UKA0193

139 Pawar, Mr Akshaj (Student, University of Durham) UKA0048

140 Peace Direct UKA0124

141 Peck, Dr. Sarah (Assistant Professor, Northumbria University); and Baillie Smith, Professor Matt (Professor, Northumbria University) UKA0119

142 Pender, Hugh UKA0145

143 Plan International UK UKA0074

144 Ponce, Lorenzo Fong (Senior Program Manager, Amazon) UKA0100

145 Publish What You Fund UKA0065

146 RINGO Project UKA0017

147 Radford, Mr David UKA0195

148 Restless Development UKA0041

149 Results UK UKA0050

150 Rethink Charity Foundation UKA0045

151 Rights Lab, University of Nottingham UKA0037

152 Riley, Shepard (President, Effective Altruism Manchester) UKA0056

153 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists UKA0055

154 Samanu UKA0138

155 SIDA - Scotland’s International Development Alliance UKA0032

156 STOPAIDS; Equal International; Salamander Trust; Frontline AIDS; and AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) UK UKA0194

157 Safeguarding Leads Network; and British Expertise UKA0072

158 Save the Children UKA0205

159 Scott, Professor Martin (Professor of Media and Global Development , University of East Anglia, School of Global Development) UKA0013

160 Scottis UKA0198

161 Send My Friend to School; and Results UK UKA0176

162 Sightsavers UKA0096

163 Simpson, Elizabeth UKA0060

164 Small International Development Charities Network UKA0091

165 South West International Development Network UKA0201

166 Start Network UKA0147

167 Systemic Innovation Ltd UKA0009

168 TLG Capital UKA0181

169 Tarr, Mr Joseph UKA0046

170 Tearfund UKA0159

171 The Co-operative Group UKA0134

172 The Downforce Trust UKA0079

173 The HALO Trust UKA0110

174 The Independent UKA0084

175 The Leprosy Mission Great Britain; and LEPRA UKA0156

176 The Movement for Community-Led Development UKA0175

177 The ONE Campaign UKA0136

178 The One Foundation UKA0122

179 The Open University UKA0162

180 The Share Trust UKA0211

181 The United Kingdom Committee for UNICEF (UNICEF UK) UKA0021

182 Transform Trade UKA0197

183 Tropical Agriculture Association International (TAAI) UKA0127

184 Ultra Philanthropy UKA0066

185 United Against Malnutrition and Hunger (UAMH) UKA0016

186 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) UKA0206

187 United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) UKA0053

188 University College London - Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy (UCL – STEaPP) UKA0148

189 University of Glasgow UKA0154

190 Unlimit Health; and UK Coalition against NTDs UKA0183

191 WaterAid UKA0082

192 Wellcome Trust UKA0069

193 Wibberley, Professor John (Freelance & semi-retired, REALM & SAPD University of Reading & RAU Cirencester) UKA0075

194 Wildlife Conservation Society UKA0132

195 Windracers Ltd. UKA0093

196 World Vision UK UKA0188

197 Yan, Dr Yifei (Assistant Professor, University of Southampton) UKA0031

List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament

All publications from the Committee are available on the publications page of the Committee’s website.

Session 2024–26

Number	Title	Reference
8th	Empowering Development: Energy Access for Communities	HC 849
7th	Assessing Value, Ensuring Impact: The FCDO’s Approach to Value for Money in Official Development Assistance	HC 422
6th	The FCDO’s Approach to Displaced People	HC 525
5th	Protection not permission: The UK’s role in upholding international humanitarian law and supporting the safe delivery of humanitarian aid	HC 526
4th	The ‘In Development’ process	HC 333
3rd	The Government’s efforts to achieve SDG2: Zero Hunger	HC 515
2nd	Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory	HC 373
1st	Appointment of the Chief Commissioner of the Independent Commission for Aid Impact	HC 448
7th Special	Empowering Development: Energy Access for Communities: Government response	HC 1626
6th Special	The FCDO’s approach to displaced people: Government response	HC 1522
5th Special	Protection not permission: The UK’s role in upholding international humanitarian law and supporting the safe delivery of humanitarian aid: Government Response	HC 1301
4th Special	The Government’s efforts to achieve SDG2: Zero Hunger: Government Response	HC 923
3rd Special	Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory: Government Response	HC 797
2nd Special	The UK Small Island Developing States Strategy: Government Response	HC 597
1st Special	FCDO and disability-inclusive development: Government Response	HC 568

---

Footnotes

1 Oral evidence taken by the Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday 8 July 2025, Q151 and Q154 [Sir Oliver Robbins]

2 Q114

3 See, for example, University of Glasgow (UKA0154); United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (UKA0206) para 3; British Expertise International (UKA0146); The ONE Campaign (UKA0136); Action for Sustainable Development (UKA0029); Malaria No More UK (UKA0081); Mr Akshaj Pawar (Student at University of Durham) (UKA0048) para 1.2

4 See, for example, Dr Megha Kashyap (Decolonising Research Fellow at London South Bank University); Ipsita Divedi (Researcher at Freelance) (UKA0005) para 11; The United Kingdom Committee for UNICEF (UNICEF UK) (UKA0021) para 4.2.1; Restless Development (UKA0041); Chatham House, UK in the World programme (UKA0168)

5 See, for example, Christian Aid (UKA0026) section 2

6 Nick Dyer confirmed that no review of multilateral reviews is currently underway of planned imminently. (Q12)

7 Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (UKA0196)

8 See Q96 [Freddie Carver]; Q92 [Gideon Rabinowitz]

9 Oxford Policy Management (UKA0160)

10 ICAI has found that this is something the UK Government has struggled to do in the past (Independent Commission for Aid Impact (UKA0212))

11 Minister Chapman confirmed that communicating multilateral programming to bilateral partners is something the Government is not doing but “might want to think about” it (Q114); she described the Government as making a “shocking job” of communicating what the UK’s contribution to the World Bank achieve to the UK public (Q127)

12 See, for example, Results UK (UKA0050)

13 See, for example, Q70 [Gideon Rabinowitz]; Q93 [Freddie Carver]

14 Oral evidence taken by the Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday 8 July 2025, Q151 and Q154 [Sir Oliver Robbins]

15 See, for example, Institute of Development Studies (UKA0068) para 3.1; Age International (UKA0080) para 2; Hleb Buziuk (Independent policy researcher and human-rights advocate at FairGo CIC) (UKA0038) para 4.4; Restless Development (UKA0041)

16 See, for example, Restless Development (UKA0041); Results UK (UKA0050) section 2; Q94 [Freddie Carver]

17 Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office (UKA0196)

18 See, for example, Restless Development (UKA0041); Action for Sustainable Development (UKA0029) para 5; Bond (UKA0177);

19 Q75 [Anna Schuesterl]

20 See, for example, Q55–56 [Lois Austin]

21 Q170 [Baroness Chapman and Melinda Bohannon]

22 Q169–170, Q173

23 For more information pertaining to the Committee’s concerns see letter from the Chair to the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs regarding structural changes in the FCDO and the future of UK ODA, 28 November 2025

24 For concerns from the unions see Association for Development and Diplomacy (UKA0216); and Qq1–68 [Lois Austin and Martin John]

25 Q75 [Freddie Carver]

26 Association for Development and Diplomacy (UKA0216)

27 See, for example, Unlimit Health, UK Coalition against NTDs (UKA0183) section 12; SIDA - Scotland’s International Development Alliance (UKA0032)

28 Q167

29 For example, see Q198 [Chido Govera]; Q201 [Sapphire Alexander]; Q215 [Dr Jennifer Hudson]

30 We heard that “[…]by and large, the (UK) public wanted to spend in places where the need was greatest, and that overrode almost all other considerations by a significant factor.” Q231 [Dr Jennifer Hudson]

31 See, for example, International Rescue Committee (UKA0117); Chatham House, UK in the World programme (UKA0168); Q75 [Freddie Carver]

32 See, for example, The United Kingdom Committee for UNICEF (UNICEF UK) (UKA0021) para 1.5; Conservation International UK, Campaign for Nature, Fauna & Flora, RSPB, The Nature Conservancy, WWF-UK, Zoological Society of London (ZSL) (UKA0036)

33 See, for example, Gender and Development Network (GADN) (UKA0095)

34 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (UKA0055); Plan International UK (UKA0074); CARE International UK (UKA0165)

35 See, for example, Foreign Affairs Committee, Tenth Report of Session 2022–23, Countries at crossroads: UK engagement in Central Asia, HC1158, para 48

36 See, for example, Age International (UKA0080) para 6; CBM UK (Global Disability Inclusion) (UKA0063) para A.a.i.; BOND Disability and Development Group (UKA0187) para 1.2

37 Q135