It was inevitable that the announced cut to Britain’s international aid budget would cause a stir. The curtailment earlier this month of the USAID programme provoked outrage among progressive voices worldwide, despite the fact that scheme funded some dubious causes. Why, then, would our compassionate classes react any different?
Yesterday, Prime Minister Keir Starmer explained that his plan to increase defence spending would be partly balanced by a reduction in the aid budget, from 0.5 per cent to 0.3 per cent of GDP. Some of his Labour colleagues aren’t happy. Sarah Champion, the Labour chair of the international development committee, reacted: ‘Conflict is often an outcome of desperation, climate and insecurity; our finances should be spent on preventing this, not the deadly consequences.’ Elsewhere, Clare Short concluded her thoughts on the matter: ‘I am afraid that, in many respects, this is simply not a Labour government’.
These countries do suffer from poverty, but that should be a problem for their governments to address
Further afield, Romilly Greenhill, the chief executive of Bond, which represents British aid organisations, denounced this ‘shortsighted and appalling move’ which would ‘have devastating consequences for millions of marginalised people worldwide’.
Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in