By Peter McLaren-Kennedy • 29 October 2022 • 10:05
The report released on Saturday, October 29 says that is because a large percentage of the money set aside for aid is being spent on housing and supporting refugees.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, changed the rules slashing the budget from 0.7 per cent to 0.5 per cent as well as allowing the Home Office and other departments to redirect funds intended for international aid. That meant these funds no longer needed to be spent on genuine aid but could instead be spent locally but still be classified as international aid.
Of the £11 billion annual budget around 40 per cent is allocated to multinational aid programmes such as those run by the World Bank, but more than half of the remaining funds aren’t leaving the country at all.
Counting refugee-housing as official development assistance is acceptable under internationally agreed rules, however the UK is one the few that has is using the funds to assist Ukrainian refugees and the only G7 country to do so.
Ranil Dissanayake Policy Fellow at the CGD is critical: “Saying we spend 0.5 per cent of our national income on aid is becoming meaningless, when such a huge proportion of this pot is being spent domestically, rather than on helping people facing enormous hardship across the world.”
He goes on to say that development budgets across the world are being squeezed but what the UK is doing is adding to the hardship in other countries.
Andrew Mitchell, who has been appointed as Development Minister in the Foreign Office, rebelled against Sunak’s cuts at the time. It is hoped that in the role he will be able to reverse some of those changes.
But with the UK facing a financial black hole the Telegraph has said the development budget could be further squeezed.
Stefan Dercon, Professor of Economic Policy at Oxford University’s Blavatnik School of Government says: “Mr Mitchell focused strongly on results for the poor, and value for money, but at the moment, the way budgets are handled they deliver neither.”
He tweeted on Wednesday: “Aid is now only 0.3 per cent of GNI (gross national income) once we account for all asylum/refugee costs and other spending programmes for Ukraine inside the UK. That is now less than it was before 1997.”
He predicts more cuts to humanitarian spending and less for those things the UK built a reputation for doing well.
A spokesperson at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said: “Across government, there are significant pressures on the 0.5% ODA budget due to the costs of accepting refugees from Afghanistan and Ukraine as well as wider migration challenges. Obviously how many refugees arrive in any particular period is not certain, so there is not a fixed cost.
“We remain one of the largest global aid donors, spending more than £11 billion in aid in 2021, and UK aid has recently gone towards those in need in the Horn of Africa and Pakistan.”
How the UK’s foreign aid budget is spent, is an emotive topic and one that does not enjoy everyone’s support with many wanting to see more money spent at home on Britain’s needy. But international opinion and agreement is that the wealthier countries should help those less well off, something the UK has always enjoyed a good reputation for. Could that now be under threat?
Thank you for taking the time to read this article, do remember to come back and check The Euro Weekly News website for all your up-to-date local and international news stories and remember, you can also follow us on Facebook and Instagram.
Share this story
Subscribe to our Euro Weekly News alerts to get the latest stories into your inbox!
By signing up, you will create a Euro Weekly News account if you don’t already have one. Review our
Originally from South Africa, Peter is based on the Costa Blanca and is a web reporter for the Euro Weekly News covering international and Spanish national news.
Got a news story you want to share? Then get in touch at [email protected]
100 % the correct way to go
Why give aid to the likes of India . They are more wealthy than the Uk .
and Pakistan I know they have problems but if you give them aid . Do they ever aprésate it . No both country’s buy there arms from Russia .crazy
What a biased article. “That meant these funds no longer needed to be spent on genuine aid” – what are you talking about? The bleedin’ heart liberals never stop telling us that the continuous stream of boat people(almost all young men) invading UK shores are ‘fleeing terror, war and famine’ (even though 70% of them are now coming from Albania) and so are you and they now saying these poor people do not need aid? You can’t have it both ways. The UK taxpayer is paying £7 MILLION pounds a day to put these illegal economic migrants up in hotels and give them comforts that UK citizens do not get eg free heating. That’s £2 BILLION pounds a year, of taxpayer’s money, many of whom will not be able to afford to heat their homes this winter.
Are you saying that foreign aid should not be spent on foreigners in need, which you and most of the media claim they are? If it diverts money away from genuine causes then perhaps the woke left will eventually wake up and realise what a crisis it is and agree that it cannot continue. But currently all they do is scream how cruelly we are treating these ILLEGAL immigrants despite their conditions being immeasurably better than the conditions they claim they are fleeing from.
Charity begins at home, If the UK is feeling overwhelmed then it is due to years of open borders and the lure of generous benefits that are given as a priority over and above the indigenous population. the refugee convention is out of date and was designed for a different era, and is therefore exploited by criminal gangs for their business model.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Download our media pack in either English or Spanish.