Fifth Report - Extreme poverty and the Sustainable Development Goals

We welcome the FCDO’s position papers on health systems strengthening for global health security and universal health coverage, and ending preventable deaths of mothers, babies and children by 2030. We recommend the Government builds on these, and the disability inclusion … Read more We welcome the FCDO’s position papers on health systems strengthening for global health security and universal health coverage, and ending preventable deaths of mothers, babies and children by 2030. We recommend the Government builds on these, and the disability inclusion and rights strategy, and develops a coherent cross- departmental Global Health Strategy, with clearly defined targets and delivery plans, within six months. We repeat our previous call for this to set out how the UK intends to use levers at multilateral and bilateral levels to achieve its aims, how this ensures progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goal, and how the strategy will reach the most marginalised and vulnerable communities. Show less

View Details →

As well as continuing to use its expertise to train teachers, the FCDO should focus education spending on the most impactful programmes for poverty reduction, particularly early years and primary education. All programmes should be disability inclusive, recognising the additional … Read more As well as continuing to use its expertise to train teachers, the FCDO should focus education spending on the most impactful programmes for poverty reduction, particularly early years and primary education. All programmes should be disability inclusive, recognising the additional barriers disabled children face when accessing education. Show less

View Details →

The FCDO should continue to use its expertise and influence to champion social protection systems and universal health coverage. The COVID-19 pandemic showed the value of such systems, which are already urgently needed due to the effects of climate change … Read more The FCDO should continue to use its expertise and influence to champion social protection systems and universal health coverage. The COVID-19 pandemic showed the value of such systems, which are already urgently needed due to the effects of climate change and food insecurity and are likely to become even more important in the future. Show less

View Details →

Although low-income countries are often disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and can play a vital role in mitigation, they are mostly mitigating the emissions of other countries, including the UK. It is right that we invest in … Read more Although low-income countries are often disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and can play a vital role in mitigation, they are mostly mitigating the emissions of other countries, including the UK. It is right that we invest in mitigation, in line with our own net-zero initiatives, but it should not be at the cost of vital aid programming. Given the reduced Official Development Assistance budget and pressure from other spending, the Government should carefully consider whether all current climate finance counted as ODA should continue to be categorised in that way, especially if such finance entails mitigation for emissions that low-income countries did not cause. We must ensure that climate finance does not just target the poorest countries, but that it is tailored to benefit the poorest communities within those countries. Listening to the perspectives and priorities of those on the front-line of the climate disaster, and ensuring that the modalities for accessing financing enable communities to adapt their lives and livelihoods, should be the new ‘business as usual’. (Paragraph 56) 54 Extreme poverty and the Sustainable Development Goals The UK’s role in reducing extreme poverty Show less

View Details →

In the current global climate, the need to ‘put the last first’ is perhaps even greater than it was at the gavelling of the Sustainable Development Goals. The UK Government can help catalyse global action, reinstate UK leadership, and ensure … Read more In the current global climate, the need to ‘put the last first’ is perhaps even greater than it was at the gavelling of the Sustainable Development Goals. The UK Government can help catalyse global action, reinstate UK leadership, and ensure coherence with domestic strategy, by creating a deliberate and dedicated Leave no one behind portfolio within FCDO, to put the furthest behind first. Such a commitment would be a timely, and impactful announcement at the UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development Voluntary National Review session in July 2023, demonstrating the power of a UK Government ‘promise’. Show less

View Details →

We welcome the Government’s decision to appoint a Minister for Development who will attend Cabinet. We also welcome the response to our letter that the Government is still committed to the ‘Leave no one behind’ pledge, but we were disappointed … Read more We welcome the Government’s decision to appoint a Minister for Development who will attend Cabinet. We also welcome the response to our letter that the Government is still committed to the ‘Leave no one behind’ pledge, but we were disappointed by the lack of explicit mention of that pledge in the recent International Development Strategy. The then Foreign Secretary argued that such an explicit reference was unnecessary, but we disagree; words matter. The UK has historically been a global leader in poverty reduction. Those working in the development space all over the world and other governments will be taking note of the UK’s priorities. To maintain the UK’s status as a global leader in tackling extreme poverty, the FCDO should explicitly reaffirm its commitment to the Leave no one behind agenda, including achieving Sustainable Development Goal Target 1.1 of eliminating extreme poverty by 2030. Show less

View Details →

We recognise that the FCDO may not have automatically carried over DFID’s targets. As the proportion of extremely poor people living in fragile and conflict- affected states and regions continues to rise, however, this link must be recognised in targeting … Read more We recognise that the FCDO may not have automatically carried over DFID’s targets. As the proportion of extremely poor people living in fragile and conflict- affected states and regions continues to rise, however, this link must be recognised in targeting Official Development Assistance spending. The FCDO should recommit to DFID’s previous target of spending 50% of its ODA budget in fragile states and regions. Show less

View Details →

The Government said in its response to our inquiry that it scaled back programmes in “countries and regions that are better positioned to bounce back from COVID-19”. It is not clear what the basis was for the reductions of allocations … Read more The Government said in its response to our inquiry that it scaled back programmes in “countries and regions that are better positioned to bounce back from COVID-19”. It is not clear what the basis was for the reductions of allocations by more than half in, for example, Yemen, South Sudan and Ethiopia. What is clear, not least from the cuts to programmes in Africa, is that impact on poverty reduction was given far less consideration than it should have been, given that that should be the primary purpose of UK ODA. The FCDO must urgently review the methodology used when making these cuts, and explain in its response to this report how it will avoid any such failures in future. In addition, as the FCDO “revisits” its allocations for the coming years, poverty alleviation must be the primary priority in determining where to focus and protect spending. Show less

View Details →

Trade and investment are proven means of reducing poverty, but the Government cannot rely on “trickle-down development”. Policies based on trade and investment must include the world’s poorest people. As the Government increases ODA spending through development finance, it is … Read more Trade and investment are proven means of reducing poverty, but the Government cannot rely on “trickle-down development”. Policies based on trade and investment must include the world’s poorest people. As the Government increases ODA spending through development finance, it is vital that such spending targets the poorest and is not just invested in middle-income countries where returns may be higher. The BII Impact Framework should be updated to include scoring based on the new World Bank definition of extreme poverty of $2.15 a day, in addition to its current metric of $5.50 a day. The BII annual report should set out the proportion of investments meeting the new metric, which would ensure that BII investments support the world’s poorest communities. Other investment partnerships, such as those planned with G7 partners, should also establish clear frameworks targeting poverty reduction in low- and-middle-income countries. Show less

View Details →

The FCDO must work with the Department for International Trade to ensure that trade policy is predicated on creating inclusive, sustainable growth and supporting economic diversification, particularly in countries facing food insecurity and/or climate threats. Read more The FCDO must work with the Department for International Trade to ensure that trade policy is predicated on creating inclusive, sustainable growth and supporting economic diversification, particularly in countries facing food insecurity and/or climate threats. Show less

View Details →

Throughout this inquiry, we heard how budget reductions had affected programmes tackling poverty. The Government has stated that it knows what works in addressing extreme poverty, but it has not consistently demonstrated that insight in its funding decisions. We recommend: … Read more Throughout this inquiry, we heard how budget reductions had affected programmes tackling poverty. The Government has stated that it knows what works in addressing extreme poverty, but it has not consistently demonstrated that insight in its funding decisions. We recommend: Ȥ The FCDO must ensure that its focus on trade and investment, and the rising costs associated with Ukraine and Afghanistan, do not lead to further decreases in funding for poverty reduction programmes, such as health, nutrition, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), education, social protection and graduation programmes. Ȥ The focus must be on the entrenched poor, alongside those who have more recently slipped into extreme poverty as a result of the pandemic and global economic crisis. We need a restoration of the 0.7% of GNI target for development spending in order to effectively support the poorest people. Ȥ The FCDO should use the multidimensional poverty index (MPI) to assess need and to direct funding accordingly. (Paragraph 96) 56 Extreme poverty and the Sustainable Development Goals Strategy, reporting and transparency Show less

View Details →

A lack of policy coherence can lead to counterproductive actions, such as cutting funding to groups and regions that have previously been identified as priorities. Creating strategies is important, but they cannot exist in silos or fail to consider other … Read more A lack of policy coherence can lead to counterproductive actions, such as cutting funding to groups and regions that have previously been identified as priorities. Creating strategies is important, but they cannot exist in silos or fail to consider other previously identified strategic objectives. Furthermore, without clear targets and actions, progress cannot be measured. As well as contributing to a cross- departmental Global Health Strategy, the FCDO must link its strategies to coherent, published delivery plans, which should include clear targets, timelines and financial allocations. In particular, the disability inclusion and rights strategy 2022–2030 must feed into all the Department’s development work, or it risks becoming an empty promise. Show less

View Details →

The 2022 Aid Transparency Index noted the FCDO’s deterioration in transparency compared with DFID’s performance in 2020, in part due to “inconsistent publication of results, evaluations and objectives.” The FCDO failed to publish detailed budgets in its Annual Report and … Read more The 2022 Aid Transparency Index noted the FCDO’s deterioration in transparency compared with DFID’s performance in 2020, in part due to “inconsistent publication of results, evaluations and objectives.” The FCDO failed to publish detailed budgets in its Annual Report and Accounts 2022, which meant that we were unable to scrutinise its spending plans. We understand that allocations are subject to change, but the Department must set out provisional budgets in its annual report. Furthermore, the FCDO must address the issues highlighted by the 2022 Aid Transparency Index and return to the “very good” status previously achieved by DFID. Show less

View Details →

It has only been three years since the last Voluntary National Review. However, a great deal has changed in this time both domestically and internationally. To maintain its reputation as a global leader in development, the Government must commit to … Read more It has only been three years since the last Voluntary National Review. However, a great deal has changed in this time both domestically and internationally. To maintain its reputation as a global leader in development, the Government must commit to completing a Voluntary National Review of progress on the SDGs. Strategically, given the stand-out importance of the forthcoming SDG Summit in 2023, the last opportunity for Heads of State to collectively assess and look to accelerate progress before the SDG 2030 deadline, the UK Government must present its Voluntary National Review in 2023. An honest appraisal of both the challenges and opportunities that the UK Government is facing in terms of delivering SDG progress, married with a renewed promise to leave no one behind and commitment to SDG 1.1, could transform both the UK’s standing on development and the global conversation around these priority agendas. In addition, the Government should review our predecessor Committee’s recommendations in relation to VNRs on engagement and timescales. (Paragraph 111) Extreme poverty and the Sustainable Development Goals 57 Show less

View Details →

The effects of COVID-19, climate change and conflict are undermining decades of progress on eliminating extreme poverty. Extreme poverty drives conflict, displacement and migration. Eliminating extreme poverty is fundamental to everyone’s security and prosperity. (Paragraph 23) Effective interventions

View Details →

Poor health drives people into and traps them in extreme poverty. Withdrawing funding from programmes that fight AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and Neglected Tropical Diseases not only puts lives immediately at risk, but impacts wider objectives on education, gender equity and poverty reduction. While we were encouraged to see the UK …

View Details →

Nutrition is a keystone investment. It builds resilience in health, improves education outcomes and strengthens the economy through labour market participation. Moreover, investing in it represents very real value for money

View Details →

The FCDO’s commitment to supporting women and girls, particularly through education, is welcome. However, reductions in aid have been shown to disproportionately affect women and girls. Girls’ education is often more vulnerable when families face hardship and particularly during conflict or crises such as COVID-19. Many of these girls will …

View Details →

In summary, by weaving a tapestry of the most critical interventions, including cash, capacity-building and financial inclusion, graduation programmes have a transformative and long-term impact on the poorest households, which reap sustained economic and social benefits that far outweigh the cost of initial investment. This methodology originated from a DFID-funded …

View Details →

Adapting to climate change and building resilience is vital for poverty reduction. Reducing the debt burden allows governments in low-and-middle-income countries to spend more on public health, education and social protection programmes. The UK Government must maintain its leadership on grant-based climate finance to help countries adapt to climate change …

View Details →

Cutting funding mid-programme and awarding short-term contracts may help the Government to stay within its 0.5% GNI target, but it risks undermining previous investments and undoing hard-won progress. The most effective programmes should be scaled up and allocated long-term funding. (Paragraph 80) Extreme poverty and the Sustainable Development Goals 55

View Details →

Classifying all spending in low-and-middle-income countries as ODA may meet the letter of OECD rules, but it contravenes their spirit. Programmes that may contribute to foreign policy objectives, but that do not have a measurable effect on poverty, should not be classified as ODA spending.

View Details →

The UK Government must trust and fund what works. Policy and spend must be dedicated to interventions that deliver, at scale, to and with those most in need. Investing in long-term partnerships provides the key to long-term change. Should ODA levels stagnate, the requirement to ensure that assistance is well-spent …

View Details →