Third Special Report
The International Development Committee published its First Report of Session 2026–27, The UK’s development partnership with Nigeria (HC 207), on 14 July 2026. The Government Response was received on 1 September 2026 and is appended below.
Appendix: Government Response
Introduction
1. The Government is grateful to the International Development Committee (IDC) for undertaking this inquiry, for its report: “The UK’s development partnership with Nigeria”, and for noting that the UK’s development partnership with Nigeria may represent an exemplar of how the UK will conduct development relationships in the coming years.
2. The Government remains steadfast in its commitment to a strong, ambitious and mutually beneficial partnership with Nigeria. As Africa’s largest democracy and one of the United Kingdom’s most important partners in Africa, Nigeria is central to our shared ambitions for economic growth, security, stability and prosperity. Through the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership, the UK is working with Nigeria to advance shared priorities including economic growth, security, migration, development and international cooperation. The Government remains committed to supporting Nigeria’s development objectives through a modern partnership that draws on the full breadth of the UK offer, including development assistance, technical expertise, investment, trade and diplomacy. In line with this approach, we are supporting Nigeria’s ambition to strengthen domestic systems and institutions, mobilise its own resources, and sustain development progress over the long term. Our objective is not to create dependency, but to help lay the foundations for greater resilience, self-reliance and locally led development. We will continue to work alongside Nigeria to support inclusive economic growth, strengthen institutions, address humanitarian need, and help ensure that the benefits of growth and reform are felt by all Nigerians.
3. The Conclusion and Recommendation numbers below directly correspond to the paragraph numbers in the IDC Report.1
The Four Essential Shifts and the Africa Approach
Conclusion 5: We are disappointed by the delayed release of the FCDO’s Official Development Assistance country allocations for the coming years. This made deeper scrutiny of FCDO strategy in Nigeria difficult while our inquiry was under way, as we did not have access to spending plans for the years ahead.
Recommendation 6: The Department must commit to aligning the announcement of new approaches and strategies with the release of spending plans, in order to generate confidence in its plans and its appetite for transparency.
Government Response to Recommendation 6: Disagree.
4. The Government agrees that transparency around ODA priorities and spending is important. However, the Government does not agree that announcements of new strategies or policy approaches should be formally linked to the publication of detailed spending plans. Policy and strategy development and spending decisions operate on different timescales and are subject to separate Cabinet, Spending Review and parliamentary processes. For example, although they were announced at different times, the UK’s new Africa Approach and Modern Development Approach closely informed the allocation of FCDO ODA budgets, including to Nigeria. Requiring simultaneous publication in all circumstances would reduce flexibility and could delay the communication of important policy decisions. The Government will continue to provide spending information through established mechanisms, including Spending Reviews, Estimates, Annual Reports, Accounts, and other parliamentary reporting requirements.
The Nigeria-UK Strategic Partnership
Conclusion 19: The UK’s partnership with Nigeria represents a grand strategic bet: assisting Nigeria to improve its economy, administration and security in order to unlock its growth potential, and then capitalising on the two countries’ shared history and people-to-people links in order to achieve development objectives in the country, as well as further mutual benefits for both nations.
Conclusion 20: We welcome the long-term, strategic partnership established between the UK and Nigeria, grounded in shared interests relating to stability, security and economic development. The strategy represents a wider shift in development strategy from the UK Government, with the intention of putting partnership and mutual benefit at the centre of programming. However, these mutual benefits will not be realised if the humanitarian and security issues threatening Nigerian stability are allowed to grow, potentially undermining the partnership.
Conclusion 21: As we outlined in our report, “The Future of UK Aid and Development Assistance”, the FCDO will need to set out further details on how its four essential shifts can create a step-change in policy efficacy and implementation. A belief that a changed mindset alone will make a marked difference, in an era of significantly constrained spending, risks giving the impression of unrealistic optimism in the FCDO’s policy levers.
Recommendation 22: The FCDO must develop a clear monitoring framework for assessing implementation of the humanitarian-development-peace nexus in Nigeria. This framework should include:
- the proportion of programmes containing integrated cross-sector objectives;
- the proportion of funding allocated to multi-sector programming;
- measures of local civil society and women-led participation;
- indicators relating to displacement, livelihoods and community resilience;
- and the balance between preventive and emergency spending;
The FCDO should report progress on this to the Committee within six months of the publication of this report, and annually thereafter.
Government Response to Recommendation 22: Partially agree.
5. The Government welcomes the Committee’s recognition of the importance of the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership and agrees that progress against the objectives of the Partnership should be monitored and assessed. Nigeria is a major regional power, and the Strategic Partnership provides a framework for advancing our shared interests across economic growth, security, migration, development cooperation, foreign policy and our people-to-people links. The Government remains committed to ensuring that this partnership delivers tangible benefits for both Nigerian and British citizens.
6. The Government also recognises the serious challenges that Nigeria continues to face. Humanitarian need remains acute in parts of the country, insecurity continues to affect communities across the North, and instability in the wider Sahel carries risks for regional prosperity and security. We agree with the Committee that deterioration in these conditions could affect the broader operating environment in which the Strategic Partnership is being implemented. Continued efforts to meet humanitarian need, strengthen resilience and support stability are therefore essential components of our engagement with Nigeria.
7. However, the Government does not characterise the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership as a “grand strategic bet”. Rather, it reflects a clear recognition of Nigeria’s importance as a major Commonwealth partner, Africa’s largest democracy and one of its largest economies, and a country with deep people-to-people, economic and diplomatic links to the United Kingdom. The Partnership is grounded in mutual interests, shared priorities and a long-term commitment to cooperation. It recognises both the opportunities presented by Nigeria’s economic and demographic potential and the value of working together to address common challenges.
8. The Government notes the Committee’s conclusion that further evidence is needed on how the UK’s development approach is evolving in practice. In Nigeria, the UK’s work is already demonstrating the four shifts set out by the Government.
9. First, we are shifting from donor to partner and investor, using Official Development Assistance to mobilise wider sources of finance and investment. Through programmes such as Manufacturing Africa, UK support has helped mobilise significant private sector investment, supporting job creation, industrial development and sustainable economic growth.
10. Second, we are shifting from service delivery to systems strengthening. As seen by the IDC during their visit to a health facility in Kano, the UK is supporting Nigerian-led reforms to strengthen governance, financing and service delivery across the health sector. Our health systems strengthening partnership with Nigeria, delivered primarily through the Lafiya programme, aims to embed reforms and achieve sustainable outcomes, beyond the lifetime of UK Official Development Assistance. The Climate Resilient Infrastructure for Basic Services (CRIBS) programme has similarly demonstrated approaches that are now being embedded into national systems and scaled through World Bank financing.
11. Third, we are shifting from grants to expertise and technical partnership. UK institutions, including HMRC, the Bank of England, the UK Health Security Agency, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the UK Office for National Statistics and others, are working alongside Nigerian counterparts to strengthen public finance management, tax administration, economic governance and health security. This reflects Nigeria’s growing demand for peer-to-peer partnerships and technical collaboration. These partnerships are already delivering results, from strengthening domestic revenue mobilisation to bolstering Nigeria’s capacity to prevent, detect and respond to public health threats.
12. Fourth, we are shifting from externally led interventions to locally owned leadership and solutions. Across our portfolio we are supporting Nigerian-led reform efforts, strengthening local institutions and increasing the role of local actors in programme delivery. In humanitarian and peacebuilding contexts, this includes working with national and local organisations, government institutions and communities to support sustainable, Nigerian owned approaches to resilience, recovery and conflict prevention.
13. The Government agrees with the intent of the recommendation and recognises the importance of transparency, accountability and parliamentary scrutiny. However, the Government does not consider that a separate reporting mechanism to the Committee is necessary. Progress against the UK’s objectives in Nigeria will continue to be monitored through existing governance, planning and reporting processes, including programme monitoring and evaluation arrangements, Country Business Planning processes, Delivery Board structures, published programme information, Ministerial correspondence and the Government’s wider accountability to Parliament. These mechanisms provide appropriate oversight of progress while avoiding duplication and additional reporting burdens.
Humanitarian Need and Displacement
Conclusion 43: The Committee is deeply concerned by the scale of humanitarian need in Nigeria and by evidence that humanitarian systems are increasingly unable to meet demand. These issues have the potential to undermine the goals of the Nigeria-UK Strategic Partnership.
Conclusion 44: Nigeria has the potential to take on responsibility for meeting its own humanitarian need. It is right that the FCDO is working alongside the Government of Nigeria to achieve this end, allowing UK ODA to be reallocated to projects and programmes that work towards the UK’s strategic development goals in the country.
Recommendation 45: In response to this report, the Government must detail the steps it is taking to assist the Nigerian Government to assume responsibility for meeting its own humanitarian need.
Government response to Recommendation 45: Agree.
14. The UK is supporting the Government of Nigeria to assume greater responsibility for meeting humanitarian needs through a combination of systems strengthening, resilience-building and support to nationally led response mechanisms. Through the Humanitarian Assistance and Resilience Programme (HARP), the UK is helping to build the capacity of Nigerian civil society organisations and increase the role of local actors in humanitarian delivery. At the programme level, HARP has made strong progress in directing funding through local organisations including via the Nigeria Humanitarian pooled Fund where 73% of funding in 2025 went to national NGOs, strengthening their ability to respond to humanitarian crises.
15. In parallel, the UK is investing in food security, nutrition, livelihoods and community resilience to address the underlying drivers of humanitarian need and reduce long-term dependence on international assistance. The UK also works closely with federal and state authorities, UN agencies and other partners to strengthen Nigerian-led coordination and response systems. Through this approach, the UK is supporting a gradual transition towards a more sustainable and nationally owned humanitarian response, while continuing to provide targeted assistance where humanitarian needs remain acute.
Conclusion 51: We are concerned by evidence that funding reductions have weakened displacement monitoring.
Recommendation 52: Within six months of the publication of this report, the FCDO should share with us funding and programming details for humanitarian and conflict monitoring, displacement tracking and early-warning systems across Nigeria, including how data from these systems is integrated into wider programming in the country.
Government Response to Recommendation 52: Partially agree.
16. The Government recognises the importance of robust humanitarian and conflict monitoring systems in informing effective programming in Nigeria but does not agree that additional reporting on these activities is necessary, given that Annual Reviews and Project Completion Reports already exist to document programme delivery. Through HARP and the Strengthening Peace and Resilience in Nigeria (SPRiNG) programme, FCDO supports a range of mechanisms that monitor humanitarian needs, displacement, food insecurity, malnutrition, protection risks and conflict dynamics. Under HARP, FCDO-funded partners utilise humanitarian needs assessments, food security analysis, nutrition surveillance, protection monitoring and displacement data to identify needs, target assistance and adapt programming in response to emerging crises. Evidence from these systems informs programmatic decisions on food assistance, nutrition services, protection activities and preparedness planning, including responses to flooding, displacement and worsening food insecurity.
17. SPRiNG provides targeted support to conflict monitoring and early warning and early response systems at federal, state and community levels. This includes support to early warning strategies, standard operating procedures and conflict monitoring networks. These systems enable government, security actors and communities to identify and respond to emerging tensions, helping to prevent violence and strengthen local resilience.
18. Data generated through these systems is integrated into wider UK programming by informing geographic prioritisation, programme design, monitoring tools such as Annual Reviews, policy engagement and adaptive management. Together, these investments help ensure that UK humanitarian, resilience and peacebuilding programmes are evidence-based, responsive to changing needs and aligned with efforts to strengthen Nigerian-led systems for managing humanitarian and conflict risks.
Instability and insecurity
Conclusion 64: We are shocked by the Minister’s admission that the international community has “failed” in the Sahel.
Recommendation 65: The Government must undertake a review, to be shared with the Committee no later than six months from the publication of this report, on how it can contribute towards strengthening regional approaches to insecurity and instability across the Sahel and Lake Chad Basin, recognising the increasingly transnational nature of displacement, organised violence and climate pressures.
Government Response to Recommendation 65: Partially agree.
19. The Government agrees that insecurity and instability across the Sahel and Lake Chad Basin are driven by interconnected challenges, including conflict, violent extremism, displacement and climate pressures. The UK supports regional efforts to address these challenges through diplomatic engagement, humanitarian assistance and development programming, including support for conflict prevention, stabilisation and resilience in north-east Nigeria and the wider Lake Chad Basin. Through programmes such as SPRiNG, the UK is helping strengthen locally led peacebuilding and addressing drivers of instability.
20. The Government recognises the importance of effective international and regional cooperation in responding to these challenges. However, it does not consider a separate review and reporting mechanism on regional approaches to insecurity and instability across the Sahel and Lake Chad Basin to be necessary. The IDC is currently undertaking an inquiry into the UK’s engagement in the Sahel, which provides the appropriate forum for examining the UK’s approach and opportunities to strengthen regional responses. The Government will continue to engage constructively with that inquiry.
Conclusion 81: Instability in Nigeria cannot be addressed through military responses alone and requires a comprehensive strategy addressing the underlying drivers of conflict and insecurity. It is not the responsibility of the UK alone to address this instability.
Conclusion 82: We are encouraged by many of the programmes implemented by the FCDO across Nigeria. The Propcom+ programme, for instance, has been independently assessed to be achieving commendable results in agricultural transformation, which will combat several drivers of instability, including poverty and tensions over land use.
Conclusion 83: However, left unchecked, this instability will make it impossible for the UK to achieve its development goals across Nigeria, potentially undermining the wider Nigeria-UK strategic partnership.
Conclusion 84: While many of these programmes satisfy the pleas made to us by witnesses and stakeholders for improvements in UK programming across Nigeria and the Sahel, they are clearly insufficient: conflict, extremism and banditry continue to rise, with severe knock-on effects for Nigerians and for regional security. Given the relatively low UK spending on responses to security issues, in comparison to the scale of the challenge, only time will tell whether the technical assistance offered and capacity building engendered by these programmes will be sufficient in helping Nigeria to overcome its security challenges.
Recommendation 85: The FCDO should ensure that conflict prevention and atrocity prevention capabilities remain adequately resourced and integrated across future Nigeria and Sahel programming. This must include strengthened support for:
- early-warning systems;
- conflict monitoring;
- atrocity prevention;
- and data collection relating to displacement and violence.
Recommendation 86: The FCDO must set out its spending plans on these areas in Nigeria in response to this report, including detailed Integrated Security Fund spending plans.
Conclusion 87: While it is the case that instability arising from religious tensions is notable, we do not consider it to be a primary driver of instability across Nigeria, particularly when considered alongside compounding factors, including land disputes resulting from climate change.
Government Response to Recommendation 85: Partially agree.
21. The Government agrees that instability in Nigeria is driven by multiple interrelated factors and cannot be addressed through military responses alone. It requires sustained investment in conflict prevention, peacebuilding and resilience. Through the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership and the Security and Defence Partnership (SDP), the UK works with Nigeria to strengthen non-kinetic approaches to security, including civilian protection, human rights, community engagement and early warning systems. The Fourth SDP Dialogue in June 2026 reaffirmed the importance of whole-of-society approaches to conflict prevention, the value in strengthening early warning and early response systems, improving coordination, and bolstering the ability of peacebuilding agencies to ensure timely preventive action.
22. Through the FCDO-funded SPRiNG programme, the UK supports conflict prevention and resolution mechanisms at federal, state and community levels. This includes strengthening early warning and early response systems, conflict analysis, research and evidence generation, and community-led peacebuilding initiatives. SPRiNG uses political economy and conflict analysis and targeted research to identify emerging risks and adapt programming accordingly.
23. The UK also supports efforts to strengthen civilian protection and atrocity prevention through engagement under the SDP, including cooperation on accountability, human rights and prevention-focused approaches.
24. Conflict monitoring, early warning and evidence collection will remain integrated across future UK programming in Nigeria. The FCDO will continue to review resource allocations across its development, humanitarian and security portfolios to ensure these capabilities remain appropriately supported, including through Integrated Security Fund programmes.
Government Response to Recommendation 86: Partially agree.
25. The Government recognises the importance of transparency and parliamentary scrutiny in relation to UK support for conflict prevention and peacebuilding in Nigeria. Through the FCDO-funded SPRiNG programme, the UK supports conflict monitoring and analysis, early warning and early response systems, research and evidence generation, and community-led peacebuilding initiatives at federal, state and community levels. These investments help identify emerging risks, prevent violence and strengthen resilience.
26. The Government is committed to continuing support for these activities through SPRiNG over the lifetime of the programme. The programme will continue to strengthen conflict prevention capabilities, support locally led approaches to peacebuilding, and generate the evidence required to inform policy and programming.
27. The Integrated Security Fund provides technical assistance to address drivers of instability and extremism, in line with agreed commitments through the SDP. This includes capacity building in Counter Terrorism (CT) forensics, crisis response, intelligence analysis and CT prosecutions; supporting regional stabilisation consortia to recognise and manage local grievances; enhancing cyber resilience; and working with local leaders and civil-society organisations to strengthen community-level initiatives. Programming is designed to prioritise sustainable outcomes.
28. Information on UK programming and expenditure will continue to be provided through existing departmental reporting, published programme information and the Government’s wider accountability to Parliament.
Civil Society
Recommendation 96: The FCDO should review its current level of support for community-led early-warning, mediation and peacebuilding structures; and the level of female leadership within these structures. When sharing the findings of that report with the Committee, the FCDO should set out whether it believes its measures on these metrics are sufficient, and if not, how it intends to improve them.
Conclusion 97: Without clear information on the design and accessibility of programmes, and without equality impact assessments being carried out routinely, we are unable to scrutinise fully the degree to which FCDO programming in Nigeria is targeted at:
- women and girls;
- children;
- LGBTQ+ people
- disabled people;
- older people.
Recommendation 98: The FCDO should ensure that equality impact assessments are systematically incorporated into future programming and funding decisions relating to Nigeria, which should be available to the Committee on request.
Conclusion 99: We are impressed by the work of local organisations with whom the FCDO works, including on peacebuilding, stabilisation and early warning efforts. This is an excellent example of localisation within the FCDO’s Nigeria portfolio.
Government response to Recommendation 96: Partially agree.
29. The Government recognises the important role that community-led early warning, mediation and peacebuilding structures play in preventing violence and strengthening resilience. The FCDO-funded SPRiNG programme seeks to strengthen the role of women and other underrepresented groups in peacebuilding and conflict prevention processes. The Government will continue to assess the effectiveness of these approaches through existing programme monitoring, evaluation and learning arrangements, and will use this evidence to inform future programming and support.
Government response to Recommendation 98: Partially agree.
30. The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that UK development assistance considers its impact on people with protected characteristics and other marginalised groups, particularly women and girls, children, and people with disabilities. Promoting inclusion and reducing inequality are central to the UK’s approach to international development and are essential to delivering effective, sustainable outcomes. The Government therefore agrees with the intent of the Committee’s recommendation and the importance of ensuring that equality considerations are reflected in decision-making.
31. The Government notes the Committee’s concerns regarding the potential impact of ODA reductions on vulnerable groups. As part of decisions on the FCDO’s multi-year Official Development Assistance programme allocations for 2026 to 2029, the Department undertook a comprehensive Equality Impact Assessment which considered both legal obligations and the potential impacts of funding decisions on groups with protected characteristics. This assessment informed ministerial decision-making and helped ensure that equalities considerations were embedded throughout the allocation process. The Government also took decisions to mitigate potential negative impacts where possible, including through continued prioritisation of women and girls across the ODA portfolio and a commitment that by 2030 at least 90% of bilateral FCDO ODA will support gender equality as either a principal or significant objective.
32. The Government considers that equality impacts are already systematically incorporated into development planning and programming decisions in Nigeria. In line with the FCDO Programme Operating Framework, all programmes and policies are required to consider and provide evidence on how interventions will affect gender equality, disability inclusion, LGBT+ people and other equality considerations. This requirement forms a core part of programme design, appraisal, approval and monitoring arrangements and helps to ensure that equalities considerations are integrated throughout the programme cycle.
33. At country level, these considerations are reflected in the British High Commission’s Country Business Planning process. The FCDO’s 2026–2029 Country Business Plan for Nigeria, which sets out how the UK will deliver its objectives and priorities in Nigeria over the planning period, included an Equalities Impact Assessment. The Country Business Plan also worked to ensure a mainstreaming approach on women and girls’ considerations is applied throughout the UK’s work in Nigeria, consistent with wider FCDO’s gender mainstreaming ambitions.
34. The Government also ensures that equality considerations are embedded across programme delivery. All ODA programme spend in Nigeria applies relevant gender equality and disability inclusion policy markers, which are reported through established programme management systems and published through DevTracker. This provides transparency regarding the extent to which programmes contribute to gender equality and disability inclusion objectives and supports ongoing monitoring of programme performance.
35. However, the Government does not agree that Nigeria-specific Equality Impact Assessments should routinely be made available to the Committee on request. Equality assessments often form part of internal policy development, programme design and ministerial advice processes. The Government remains committed to transparency and parliamentary accountability through existing reporting mechanisms, including published programme information, DevTracker data, departmental reporting and engagement with Parliament. These arrangements provide appropriate scrutiny while preserving the space necessary for frank policy advice and decision-making.
36. The Government will continue to ensure that equality considerations are systematically incorporated into its development work in Nigeria and across the wider ODA portfolio, recognising that advancing opportunities and outcomes for women and girls, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups is essential both to effective development and to the delivery of the UK’s broader international objectives.
Economic Development
Conclusion 115: Economic resilience and livelihoods support should form a central component of the UK-Nigeria strategic partnership. It is vital that the partnership helps to provide economic opportunities for women and young people, recognising the role of inclusion and livelihoods in reducing vulnerability to recruitment into extremist groups and instability.
Conclusion 116: We are disappointed that the FCDO has not worked alongside BII to ensure that a reduction in forced displacement becomes a key criterion in BII’s investment decision making. With such a large portfolio across Nigeria—a country that hosts a vast number of displaced people—strategic investments from BII in this regard could make a significant difference.
Recommendation 117: Within six months of the publication of this report, the FCDO must undertake a review of all of the factors that risk undermining the UK Nigeria strategic partnership, including humanitarian need, instability, insecurity, good governance issues and the low investor confidence in Nigeria’s economy, and how it plans to mitigate those risks. Findings should be shared with the Committee no later than one year from the publication of this report.
Government response to Recommendation 117: Disagree.
37. The Government recognises the challenges identified by the Committee and agrees that humanitarian need, insecurity, instability, governance challenges and constraints on investment continue to affect Nigeria’s development trajectory. These issues are important not only for Nigeria’s future prosperity but also for the successful delivery of the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership.
38. The Government notes the Committee’s conclusion that the success of the Strategic Partnership will depend, in part, on how effectively these risks are managed. This principle is reflected in the design of the Partnership itself. The UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership was established as a whole-of-relationship framework bringing together cooperation on economic growth, trade and investment, security and defence, migration, development, foreign policy and people-to-people links. It provides a mechanism for both governments to work jointly on shared opportunities while addressing challenges that may affect long-term stability, prosperity and security.
39. The Government recognises the importance of unlocking increased investor confidence in supporting economic growth and resilience and the expansion of economic opportunities particularly for women and young people, who are the majority in Nigeria. Pillar 1 (Growth and Jobs) of the Strategic Partnership focuses on delivering the Enhanced Trade and Investment Partnership and promoting economic growth, trade, investment, skills and sustainable development. The UK and Nigeria are working together to deepen commercial ties, improve the business environment, support economic reform and strengthen cooperation across priority sectors, including financial services, infrastructure, digital technology, agriculture, education and the creative economy. UK engagement in this area is focused on supporting reforms, mobilising investment and expanding economic opportunities that can contribute to sustainable growth and increased prosperity in both countries.
40. The Government agrees that economic diversification and economic inclusion are vital components of long-term stability and development. Through the Strategic Partnership and wider development programming, the UK supports efforts to widen economic opportunity, strengthen financial inclusion, create jobs and build resilience, particularly for women, young people and marginalised communities. The Government’s approach is therefore focused not only on increasing investment and growth, but also supporting efforts to ensure economic progress contributes to more inclusive and sustainable development outcomes.
41. The Government further notes the Committee’s observations regarding the role of development finance. Nigeria is British International Investment’s (BII) 5th largest investment market globally and a key destination for patient, long-term capital. Inclusion is a key focus of BII’s investment strategy across the investment market. BII is scaling up collaboration with partners to improve how development finance institutions (DFIs) invest in fragile contexts. It co-founded the Africa Resilience Investment Accelerator with the Entrepreneurial Development Bank to bring DFIs together to accelerate private investment into Africa’s frontier markets, unlocking $133 million of investment to date. This includes targeting underserved populations and investing in the poorest countries and in fragile contexts. BII’s 2026–2031 strategy contains a target to invest at least 25% of its core capital in Least Developed Countries.
42. Through investments in agriculture, financial services, renewable energy, manufacturing and infrastructure, BII is supporting economic growth, job creation and financial inclusion, while helping to mobilise wider private investment into the Nigerian economy. BII’s investments generate development impact alongside financial returns, including by expanding access to finance, supporting productive employment and creating opportunities for underserved populations.
43. Many of BII’s current investments contribute directly to economic development and job creation in Northern Nigeria. Examples include BII’s recent investments in Babban Gona, a social enterprise that is helping boost agricultural productivity and resilience among smallholder farmers and its investment in a facility with First City Monument Bank that is designed to promote inclusion by ensuring 70% of lending is directed to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises in Northern Nigeria, with 30% ring-fenced for women-owned businesses nationwide.
44. The Government does not agree that a separate review of the risks affecting the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership, or a dedicated report to the Committee on those risks, is necessary. Assessment of factors affecting the Partnership is not a one-off exercise, but an ongoing part of how the UK manages its relationship with Nigeria. Risks relating to security, governance, humanitarian conditions, economic performance, investor confidence and programme delivery are already considered through established governance arrangements, including Strategic Partnership structures, Country Business Planning processes, portfolio oversight mechanisms and programme-level risk management systems.
45. For these reasons, the Government does not consider that establishing a new review and reporting process would add value to the oversight already undertaken through existing governance and risk management arrangements. The Government’s approach is to maintain continuous assessment of risks and opportunities and adapt its engagement accordingly. The Government will continue to engage constructively with Parliament on the implementation of the UK-Nigeria Strategic Partnership and the delivery of UK objectives in Nigeria through ministerial engagement, parliamentary scrutiny and other established accountability mechanisms.
Footnotes
1 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5902/cmselect/cmintdev/207/report.html