The House of Lords is scheduled to debate the humanitarian impacts of reductions in the UK’s official development assistance (ODA) on 13 January 2026. Lord Bates, a former minister at the Department for International Development, will ask the government to assess the effects of both actual and planned cuts in aid spending.
Official development assistance is defined by the UK government as resource flows provided by official agencies to developing countries or multilateral organizations, primarily aimed at promoting economic development and welfare. ODA includes concessional grants and soft loans. Between 2013 and 2020, the UK met its statutory target of spending 0.7% of gross national income (GNI) on ODA, but the previous Conservative government reduced this to 0.5% from 2021, citing economic challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic. Temporary increases to 0.51% and 0.58% were later recorded due to higher in-donor refugee costs. In February 2025, the Labour government announced a further reduction to 0.3% of GNI by 2027 to fund increased defence spending, marking the lowest level of UK ODA since 1999. The government has committed to restoring the 0.7% target when fiscal conditions allow.
An equality impact assessment published in July 2025 indicated that while positive impacts on equalities were maintained in humanitarian aid, multilateral funding, climate finance, and research, reductions in bilateral aid—particularly for education, health, and social protection—could have negative equality impacts. Some targeted equalities-focused programmes were deprioritized or discontinued, though the overall proportion of equalities-oriented spending remained stable.
UK ODA statistics for 2024 show a total spend of £14.08 billion, down 8.2% from 2023, with an ODA:GNI ratio of 0.50%. Bilateral aid accounted for 80.1% of total ODA, while multilateral funding was at a historic low of 19.9%. Support for refugees and asylum seekers within the UK decreased substantially, representing 20.1% of ODA. Africa received the largest regional share of bilateral aid, and the top country-specific recipients were Ukraine, Afghanistan, and Ethiopia. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office administered 67.2% of ODA, with other government departments responsible for the remainder. Independent analyses suggest that continued in-donor refugee spending could reduce overseas development aid to 0.24% of GNI by 2027.
Humanitarian organizations have strongly criticized the planned reductions. David Miliband of the International Rescue Committee described the cuts as damaging to the UK’s global humanitarian reputation. UNICEF warned that the reduction could risk lives, while the Bond network called it a “short-sighted and appalling move” likely to harm millions of marginalized people worldwide. Over 130 NGOs sent an open letter urging the government to reverse the decision. Parliamentary leaders, including Sarah Champion, chair of the House of Commons International Development Committee, argued that cutting development aid to increase defence spending is counterproductive, as it undermines global security, soft power, and progress in healthcare, education, and sustainable development. Bond also criticized the government’s equalities impact assessment as insufficient to mitigate the harm caused by the cuts.
