Select committee: International Development Committee

Conclusion 4

9th Report - Future of UK aid and development assistance: interim report Published 5 Feb 2026 Addressed to Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office

International Development Committee Future of UK aid and development assistance All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

Conclusion (the committee's words)

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) 14

From: International Development Committee, 9th Report - Future of UK aid and development assistance: interim report (HC 1330), 5 February 2026

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 22 April 2026 (deadline 5 April 2026).

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The Government's response is mixed: it disagrees with the recommendations for a multilateral development review, a communication plan and data improvements, and a pause to restructuring, partially agrees on staffing capability, bilateral spend and spending priorities, and agrees on the Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI).

On the recommendation for a multilateral development review before the end of 2026, the Government's response is "Disagree". It says the FCDO already evaluates the multilateral portfolio as part of the Spending Review and scrutinises funding under the Programme Operating Framework.
On workforce, it partially agrees with the recommendation for a skills audit and staffing assessment (Recommendation 3) but disagrees with the call to pause restructuring (Recommendation 7). It says the process "is not being rushed" and that a Workforce Strategy for the Spending Review period is being developed.
On bilateral spend, it partially agrees. It says posts "will have the flexibility and autonomy to deliver the programmes our partners want and need" and that Centrally Managed Programmes "have undergone a thorough review" during resource allocation.
On ICAI, it agrees and commits to supporting it "for at least the next 3 years". Programme allocations will average £1.68m a year, with exact profiling by year "subject to further discussions with ICAI".

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error