Select committee: International Development Committee

Recommendation 23

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 ↗

Recommendation (the committee's words)

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) 17

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