UK election: Labour rules out aid department or early return to 0.7%

Labour will not restore a separate aid department if, as expected, it wins next month’s United Kingdom general election — or restore the billions slashed from spending by the Conservatives in the near future. In an ultracautious manifesto, Keir Starmer’s party has signaled no significant change of direction if it wins power on July 4, despite it accusing the current government of having “degraded” international development. Instead, the document states Labour is “committed to restoring development spending at the level of 0.7% per cent of gross national income as soon as fiscal circumstances allow” — mirroring Conservative policy, after the 2021 cut to 0.5%. The Department for International Development was axed in 2020 when it was folded into a combined Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office. Starmer originally vowed to reverse the move. But the manifesto, launched on Thursday, opts for the status quo, stating: “Labour will strengthen international development work within the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office.” Explaining the decision, it says: “To counter the growing influence of malign actors and boost efforts to combat threats like climate change, the UK’s development work must be closely aligned with our foreign policy aims.” Aid organizations and experts were quick to criticize the failure to break with the recent past, including a failure to say how Labour will stop the diversion of £3 billion ($3.83 billion) of aid cash to house asylum-seekers in the U.K. “Hard to see this as much of a ‘change’,” said Ian Mitchell, a senior research fellow at the Center for Global Development think tank, noting the manifesto is silent “on refugee spend diverting resources away from true development.” Gideon Rabinowitz, policy director at the Bond network for U.K. aid organizations, expressed hope that Labour, once in office, might still establish “an independent department” for development. He said: “We also welcome the commitment to restoring the UK aid budget to 0.7% of Gross National Income, but concrete details and realistic timelines are essential to make this commitment meaningful.” Dorothy Sang, head of policy at CARE International UK, echoed the criticism that, on a return to 0.7%, “more clarity is required on when and how this will be delivered.” The decision not to reverse the FCDO merger will be seen as a defeat for Lisa Nandy, Labour’s shadow international development minister — who was known to favor bringing back something like DFID — and a victory for her skeptical immediate boss, the shadow foreign secretary David Lammy. Devex revealed last year that Starmer had ordered a review to examine the alternative of a development “agency” within FCDO — with operational independence — to avoid what was feared would be the “disruption and cost” of another big institutional shake-up. It was suggested the setup would be “similar” to aid delivery before Labour created DFID in 1997, when an Overseas Development Administration existed within the Foreign Office, although the ODA lacked the clout to prevent aid scandals such as the notorious Pergau dam affair, in 1993. However, a strategy paper expected at the start of 2024 has not been published. Instead, Devex understands Labour will now carry out a fresh review of the way development is delivered within FCDO once in office, to identify any gaps in expertise and accountability. The manifesto promises a Labour Britain will be “a good partner for international development” and that “regaining Britain’s global leadership on development is a key part of our plan to reconnect with our allies and partners”. It also states: “We will renew expertise and focus, especially in priority areas such as supporting economic transformation, tackling unsustainable debt, empowering women and girls, supporting conflict prevention, and unlocking climate finance.” Last year, Nandy told Devex she intended to outline specific economic tests for returning to the United Nations benchmark of spending 0.7% of national income on aid — potentially adding billions of pounds to the budget — but this has not happened. Labour has also rejected calls to stop diverting aid to pay domestic refugee bills, despite choosing not to do that when last in power. These in-donor refugee costs will only fall gradually if it gets a grip on a chaotic immigration system.