International Development Committee
Tuesday 15th September 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 1 week, 5 days ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
14:02
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Familiar. So from donor to investor, from service delivery to systems support, from grants to expertise and from international interventions to local leadership. I'm very committed to them, and I believe the committee welcomed them. And you should expect to see them continue, and also some real continuity on the allocations. And I'm conscious the committee hasn't had a chance to meet and discuss the allocations since they were released towards the end of the last session. So the allocations are not, to my mind, up for being reopened for lots of reasons that we might want to go into and inside the allocations, a focus on the Multilaterals and what can be achieved working with others.
So we expect some continuity on those three areas where I'm hoping to bring something of a new flavour, hopefully not a really radical departure that would disrupt the work of the department or partners in any way but a new focus. The first is on being energetic and unapologetic about a values led approach, and that we do development. The core purpose of our development work is to save and change lives overseas and our partner countries. And I'll be unashamed about saying so.
Secondly, focused on the five securities that I laid out in my speech last night. So health security, climate security, food security, human security, and economic security. Now, you'll see there's something of a read across to the things that we prioritised in the allocations. The reason that I've wanted to focus on those five headings is the security frame is, to my mind, the way that we a talk about the mutual interests we have between North and South, but also, and I hope this will be welcomed by the committee and of interest to the committee.
I think that's the way to bring the full capabilities of the Fcdo to bear on our development objectives. So whatever one feels about the merger, the fact that it has happened means that the Development Minister is now able to pull on, if they choose, pull on a much wider toolkit, and I'm very interested in what those of us who come from a more thematic background can learn from and draw on the context and analytical capabilities that the Fcdo has in abundance.
And the third thing, which is slightly new, is a renewed focus on the who is development for. So I've already telegraphed quite strongly in the department that I'm very keen that we maintain our focus on women and girls and a women and girls agenda beyond vogue, although that's critically important in foundational, but an agenda for women's liberation that goes much wider, and also for children and young people. So what that will mean operationally, we're still working through, but I have telegraphed quite clearly that a focus on children's rights and potential and opportunity for young people will be a big focus of what I want to see.
In every submission.
So we expect some continuity on those three areas where I'm hoping to bring something of a new flavour, hopefully not a really radical departure that would disrupt the work of the department or partners in any way but a new focus. The first is on being energetic and unapologetic about a values led approach, and that we do development. The core purpose of our development work is to save and change lives overseas and our partner countries. And I'll be unashamed about saying so.
Secondly, focused on the five securities that I laid out in my speech last night. So health security, climate security, food security, human security, and economic security. Now, you'll see there's something of a read across to the things that we prioritised in the allocations. The reason that I've wanted to focus on those five headings is the security frame is, to my mind, the way that we a talk about the mutual interests we have between North and South, but also, and I hope this will be welcomed by the committee and of interest to the committee.
I think that's the way to bring the full capabilities of the Fcdo to bear on our development objectives. So whatever one feels about the merger, the fact that it has happened means that the Development Minister is now able to pull on, if they choose, pull on a much wider toolkit, and I'm very interested in what those of us who come from a more thematic background can learn from and draw on the context and analytical capabilities that the Fcdo has in abundance.
And the third thing, which is slightly new, is a renewed focus on the who is development for. So I've already telegraphed quite strongly in the department that I'm very keen that we maintain our focus on women and girls and a women and girls agenda beyond vogue, although that's critically important in foundational, but an agenda for women's liberation that goes much wider, and also for children and young people. So what that will mean operationally, we're still working through, but I have telegraphed quite clearly that a focus on children's rights and potential and opportunity for young people will be a big focus of what I want to see.
In every submission.
14:04
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
We just pick away at some of that. Never been entirely convinced on the Africa approach. I don't think we got that much detail from the Last Minister. I believe it came out of the sort of Foreign Secretary's reset, the. We've had so many. The David Lammy approach, which seemed to me to be very much a government to government approach, was almost treating the African nations as a as a homogenous lump.
And of course, they all have different priorities, different stresses, different successes. So I wonder if you could tell us what the Africa approach actually means to you. Thank you.
And of course, they all have different priorities, different stresses, different successes. So I wonder if you could tell us what the Africa approach actually means to you. Thank you.
14:05
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So the Lord Collins, the previous Africa minister, did a very long and intensive set of consultations across Africa with, yes, government interlocutors, but also with people in the private sector and people in civil society. And what was interesting to my mind is that across those three sectors and communities, there was a very consistent message, which is we just want a very brisk and businesslike approach. And we don't mind if you're being transactional because we would like to be transactional too, because we all want to do deals that are in our mutual interest.
So some of the reflection from colleagues was sometimes British interlocutors have not been as straightforward about what they want out of the conversation as some of our other international partners. And certainly in the times of geopolitical contestation that we're in , some other partners that were available to African countries were just much more straightforward with them about, we would like access to X, Y, and Z. In return, we're willing to offer A, B, C, and colleagues across the continent said, we actually don't mind if Britain is like that.
Just be straightforward with us. And then when we're doing things that are about our values or about development and where you're here to help, that's great. Be brisk and honest about that too. So the Africa approach is, to my mind, a much more honest approach to the fact that we have foreign policy objectives across the continent, as well as development ones. It does have contained within it. I think you're right to pick this up, chair.
It does have contained within it a degree of primacy on government, which I think is legitimate and fair because the state is, in context, the duty bearer. So I think it's it's right for us to focus a lot on the relationships with government. But I come from a human rights based approach to development, which is why I say I've put this new focus on women and girls and children and young people. So how I am marrying those in my head is, yes, we should have brisk business like relationships with governments because they are the duty bearers.
But if they are to be equitable relationships of genuine partners, that means not us taking a vow of silence about never saying when we think our partners are wrong, they should tell us when they think we're wrong. And I'll reserve my right to say when I think they are failing in their duties to some of their communities. One of the things I reflected on last night at NEF is one of my worries about the SDG framework was the language of leave No one behind, which implies there's just some sort of force that carries some people along and some people just get left behind.
Actually, often people are pushed behind. They are pushed behind because the.
So some of the reflection from colleagues was sometimes British interlocutors have not been as straightforward about what they want out of the conversation as some of our other international partners. And certainly in the times of geopolitical contestation that we're in , some other partners that were available to African countries were just much more straightforward with them about, we would like access to X, Y, and Z. In return, we're willing to offer A, B, C, and colleagues across the continent said, we actually don't mind if Britain is like that.
Just be straightforward with us. And then when we're doing things that are about our values or about development and where you're here to help, that's great. Be brisk and honest about that too. So the Africa approach is, to my mind, a much more honest approach to the fact that we have foreign policy objectives across the continent, as well as development ones. It does have contained within it. I think you're right to pick this up, chair.
It does have contained within it a degree of primacy on government, which I think is legitimate and fair because the state is, in context, the duty bearer. So I think it's it's right for us to focus a lot on the relationships with government. But I come from a human rights based approach to development, which is why I say I've put this new focus on women and girls and children and young people. So how I am marrying those in my head is, yes, we should have brisk business like relationships with governments because they are the duty bearers.
But if they are to be equitable relationships of genuine partners, that means not us taking a vow of silence about never saying when we think our partners are wrong, they should tell us when they think we're wrong. And I'll reserve my right to say when I think they are failing in their duties to some of their communities. One of the things I reflected on last night at NEF is one of my worries about the SDG framework was the language of leave No one behind, which implies there's just some sort of force that carries some people along and some people just get left behind.
Actually, often people are pushed behind. They are pushed behind because the.
14:08
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Precisely so. So the way I the way I'm marrying, the fact that I do come from a human rights background and human rights based approach to development, the way I'm marrying that with a focus on equitable partnerships with governments is . Some of the content of that partnership will be brisk conversations where we think that governments are failing to uphold their obligations to their citizens, particularly when we think they're failing to uphold their obligations to citizens on the basis of their identity.
So I think you're right to pull out that there is a focus on government to government relationships in the Africa approach, but it's not to the exclusion of our relationships with civil society or community leaders or the private sector.
So I think you're right to pull out that there is a focus on government to government relationships in the Africa approach, but it's not to the exclusion of our relationships with civil society or community leaders or the private sector.
14:09
14:09
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I think I think it's going relatively well. And if I could just bring back to the the challenge from the chair, I don't think it's quite fair to say that it's been interpreted on the continent as a continent wide approach that doesn't differentiate between our relationships with different places, because the work we're doing with Nigeria on growth or the work we are doing, and I made reference to this last night at NEF. What we've done with Ghana on growth is quite different to what we're doing with some of our places that are much more about the security relationship, access to critical minerals and so on.
So I think actually people in African capitals would say they're quite clear with us. We are clear with them, and they are clear in their own minds what we want the content of the relationships to be. So I've done a lot of bilateral and again, hopefully this gives you some reassurance. Chair, I've just done in the last few weeks a lot of bilateral conversations with African ministers, and I think they would see that in each of them.
It is a bilateral relationship that's specific to that country and that they are not being treated in any sense as a kind of unmediated continental whole, although we obviously do care a lot about continental institutions like the EU and the African Development Bank, with whom we are also deepening our relationships.
So I think actually people in African capitals would say they're quite clear with us. We are clear with them, and they are clear in their own minds what we want the content of the relationships to be. So I've done a lot of bilateral and again, hopefully this gives you some reassurance. Chair, I've just done in the last few weeks a lot of bilateral conversations with African ministers, and I think they would see that in each of them.
It is a bilateral relationship that's specific to that country and that they are not being treated in any sense as a kind of unmediated continental whole, although we obviously do care a lot about continental institutions like the EU and the African Development Bank, with whom we are also deepening our relationships.
14:10
14:10
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
I guess my worry is, so the three institutions that you spoke about , governments, business and civil society, they probably all know how to engage with you. So my concern is how those people that are the most marginalised in society are given, if not support, then a voice, an acknowledgement by this government. And do you actually think that that's part of our role or is that overstepping our remit? Well, I think.
The
The
14:11
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
focus on localisation, which I say is one of the shifts that I'm very much intending to keep up, will help with that. And I actually think there's been quite a lot of somewhat opportunistic, but I actually think quite accurate commentary from the development community about whether the Prime Minister's focus on devolution is going to inform our international approach, and I think it absolutely will, because it's the same it's the same spirit that animates both, which is the people closest to the problems are best placed to generate the solutions, and neither domestically or internationally are we operating with a kind of deficit model that says all people have is is needs.
Actually, people have unending capabilities, and it's our job to put our capabilities at their service. So yes, I think a human rights based approach and coupled with localisation will give us the momentum to continue relationships with communities. And that's certainly what I'll be hoping to do.
Actually, people have unending capabilities, and it's our job to put our capabilities at their service. So yes, I think a human rights based approach and coupled with localisation will give us the momentum to continue relationships with communities. And that's certainly what I'll be hoping to do.
14:12
14:12
14:12
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So a number of members of the committee were in a conversation with myself and the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, thinking through development, finance. And one of the things that we teased out in that conversation is that is, to my mind, a trade off. And you can a spectrum rather, and you can legitimately place yourself in a number of points on this spectrum, I think. And it's for this committee and others in the development community to discuss between ourselves where we want to land on this.
The thing bilateral is really good for is attributed impact. And the thing that Multilaterals are really good for is scaled impact. And is it a tool of British soft power, and is it something where we have much more control over both impact and attribution when we do things bilaterally? Yes, but personally, I have a strong bias towards the scaled impact, and I'm personally willing to trade off quite a lot of national attribution to get to the scaled results for communities.
But I think that's something that this committee and I see others who have development expertise that that will be a debate that we're having for years now.
The thing bilateral is really good for is attributed impact. And the thing that Multilaterals are really good for is scaled impact. And is it a tool of British soft power, and is it something where we have much more control over both impact and attribution when we do things bilaterally? Yes, but personally, I have a strong bias towards the scaled impact, and I'm personally willing to trade off quite a lot of national attribution to get to the scaled results for communities.
But I think that's something that this committee and I see others who have development expertise that that will be a debate that we're having for years now.
14:13
Noah Law
-
-
Noah Law
On that point, Minister, one of our reports on the future of aid, I think, critiqued perhaps the level to which we are able to get an understanding or at least a transparent understanding, particularly from members of the public, about that attributed impacts. So I appreciate what you're saying about the difference that you're able to make at scale with multilateral approaches. But reflecting on perhaps some of those discussions that we've had in this committee over the last couple of years, do you really think that the our bilateral institutions are having the attributed impact that you described? If so, is it is it clear?
14:14
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I think one of the challenges and you can please come back in if you if you think I'm misunderstanding you, the the bias towards multilateralism, which I hold quite strongly as a prior and I believe is very obvious from our allocations, that is not uncritical, it's not uncritical. And there is three things that I drew attention to last night about challenges in the multilateral system. So one is around the effectiveness. Like it is not the case that the multilateral system has uniformly delivered results at scale in exactly the way that we would have wanted as taxpayers.
So there does need to be reform to secure effectiveness. There does need to be reform to ensure transparency in the way that you're describing and the representation in the multilateral system, particularly southern voice, is not where we would want it to be. So one of the things I laid out last night, and I hope people took some comfort from the Foreign Secretary becoming governor of the world Bank, I think on day one in the job, or certainly the announcement was in the first few days.
And one of the reasons that the Foreign Secretary was to become governor of the world Bank is so that we can drive that reform agenda. So, yes, we do have a prior and we do have a bias towards multilateral system, but it's certainly not uncritical, and it's going to come with that package of investment is going to come with a big set of reform demands as well.
So there does need to be reform to secure effectiveness. There does need to be reform to ensure transparency in the way that you're describing and the representation in the multilateral system, particularly southern voice, is not where we would want it to be. So one of the things I laid out last night, and I hope people took some comfort from the Foreign Secretary becoming governor of the world Bank, I think on day one in the job, or certainly the announcement was in the first few days.
And one of the reasons that the Foreign Secretary was to become governor of the world Bank is so that we can drive that reform agenda. So, yes, we do have a prior and we do have a bias towards multilateral system, but it's certainly not uncritical, and it's going to come with that package of investment is going to come with a big set of reform demands as well.
14:15
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Can I can I just add something to that? I mean, one of the reasons why people broadly accept our contributions to Gavi is because we can tell the story about. The UK's contribution will immunise 109 million children. And we don't do that as much as we should with our contributions to the world Bank. We talk about our £1.98 billion investment. Well, what does that mean in terms of attributed impact? So we know the world Bank, between now and 2030 will be providing access to energy to 300 million people.
So let's talk about that and let's talk about our contribution to that. The World Bank's efforts in terms of the 80 million children they're going to educate. Let's talk about that. So we don't talk enough about the impact. We're talking too much about the the money.
So let's talk about that and let's talk about our contribution to that. The World Bank's efforts in terms of the 80 million children they're going to educate. Let's talk about that. So we don't talk enough about the impact. We're talking too much about the the money.
14:16
14:16
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
We have it and we track programmes and we can tell the stories. And I could reel off a whole bunch of statistics to you about the number of people we've reached with humanitarian support in Afghanistan. But as a general rule, in terms of our communications, I mean, I think all of us and the ministers are challenging us all the time, is to lead with our impact stories, not with our money commitments. And I think that's got to be the right approach.
And this committee, and we've had this conversation many times in this committee, and I think that's what we've got to get much better at doing.
And this committee, and we've had this conversation many times in this committee, and I think that's what we've got to get much better at doing.
14:16
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
And if I could just come back on this question, I, I think where you're coming from and where we are aligned is honestly, we just haven't had the level of ministerial confidence in telling the story about why aid works that I think this committee would have liked to have seen. And I am very happy to be out there in the argument. And like, of course, there is skepticism. And of course, there will be editorial skepticism from some outlets, and there will be public skepticism at a time of straitened financial circumstances.
And we should take the argument head on. And I'm very willing and happy to do that. And I think that's a really core bit of my job.
And we should take the argument head on. And I'm very willing and happy to do that. And I think that's a really core bit of my job.
14:17
14:17
Janet Daby
-
-
Janet Daby
Thank you, chair. Hi, Kirsty. Kirsty Baroness Chapman, who previously had your position, your role as minister had a seat at the cabinet, attended cabinet meetings. I just want to get a sense of how you feel that as the minister responsible for Oda across government, how you feel you can carry out your role without attending cabinet effectively?
14:18
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So this may be a slightly strange thing for a politician to say. I was profoundly relaxed about that, because I'm not particularly motivated by the status of whether I'm in the cabinet or not. I think, like you, the thing that I need to be very alive to is if we treat a cabinet seat as a mechanism for being able to have cross-government conversations, I actually think as long as that can be secured another way, I'm profoundly relaxed , and I think it can be secured in other ways.
So as the committee may know, there has historically been a cross-government Oda board, and myself and Nic have been speaking about this from the moment of my appointment. It's very important that the accounting around Oda across government is done to the very highest standards, and I'm sure Nic is accounting officer, is very alive to the need to get that absolutely right. So that cross-government committee will need to keep doing that. However, I don't think it should be restricted to just doing that , because I think when you look at the times when the UK government has had the biggest impact on development is when there's been a cross-government development approach and when there's been policy coherence for development.
So one of the things I am looking at and taking advice from officials on is how can we reconstitute that Oda board so it still performs that very important accounting function, but actually operates much more as a cross-government policy coherence for development board. And so we're working through what the governance of that would be. And if we get that up and running and that works. The thing I would be delighted for the committee the wider development community told me to account for is, are you actually delivering policy coherence for development through that mechanism? Because it's perfectly possible to sit in the cabinet and not achieve that.
And I believe it's possible to not sit in the cabinet and achieve that. And achieving that is the prize. And the thing I'd like to be held to account for, and I've already started conversations with a number of ministerial colleagues that even in the absence of that governance framework, there's lots of people across government who are very alive to this agenda and want to help. And so, for example, the AI minister is very alive to the potential around AI for development and the risks of AI to development.
And he already wants to work with us on that. So I feel pretty heartened at the number of people across government who are seized of the development imperative. One of my sort of private objectives for my job and my time in this role is I sort of want everyone to think that the development minister.
So as the committee may know, there has historically been a cross-government Oda board, and myself and Nic have been speaking about this from the moment of my appointment. It's very important that the accounting around Oda across government is done to the very highest standards, and I'm sure Nic is accounting officer, is very alive to the need to get that absolutely right. So that cross-government committee will need to keep doing that. However, I don't think it should be restricted to just doing that , because I think when you look at the times when the UK government has had the biggest impact on development is when there's been a cross-government development approach and when there's been policy coherence for development.
So one of the things I am looking at and taking advice from officials on is how can we reconstitute that Oda board so it still performs that very important accounting function, but actually operates much more as a cross-government policy coherence for development board. And so we're working through what the governance of that would be. And if we get that up and running and that works. The thing I would be delighted for the committee the wider development community told me to account for is, are you actually delivering policy coherence for development through that mechanism? Because it's perfectly possible to sit in the cabinet and not achieve that.
And I believe it's possible to not sit in the cabinet and achieve that. And achieving that is the prize. And the thing I'd like to be held to account for, and I've already started conversations with a number of ministerial colleagues that even in the absence of that governance framework, there's lots of people across government who are very alive to this agenda and want to help. And so, for example, the AI minister is very alive to the potential around AI for development and the risks of AI to development.
And he already wants to work with us on that. So I feel pretty heartened at the number of people across government who are seized of the development imperative. One of my sort of private objectives for my job and my time in this role is I sort of want everyone to think that the development minister.
14:20
Janet Daby
-
-
Janet Daby
So no, thank you for that. And that makes complete sense. But as a previous minister in the government that obviously the ministerial meetings are absolutely the right thing to do and to have across government. But obviously, if you're a cabinet meeting, then you can speak directly to the secretaries of state, and it probably means that things can move a little bit faster than what they do sometimes in government. So I'm just wondering how you feel you can navigate those types of conversations to make sure you are having the ear of the secretaries of state across government to move things on.
14:20
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I mean, one of the key things I'd say is we do have a development representative in the cabinet in the form of the Foreign Secretary, and the Foreign Secretary could not have been clearer that he absolutely sees every element of his job title as important, and that development and climate are right at the heart of British foreign policy. They're not a kind of add on. They're not an adjunct. He sees them right at the beating heart. So I feel very confident that our Foreign Secretary will be making the case for development in every cabinet meeting, but also that he'll be providing me with sort of licence and support to be kind of roaming Whitehall to get these arguments.
14:21
14:21
James Naish
-
-
James Naish
Obviously. One thing that is cross-cutting throughout cabinet is Europe, and I was just wondering how our discussions are progressing in terms of international development with our European allies, because there was a confirmation at the last UK EU summit that there would be a dialogue on international development. Where is that got to?
14:21
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So breaking news. So I'm delighted to say that I have been invited to the EU Development Ministers meeting. I think that's the first time a British Development Minister has been invited since Brexit. Congratulations. Thank you. So I've been invited to that in October and I can't go for the I can't go for the whole of the session, but we were delighted to receive the invite and I will be going to have a series of relationships with a series of discussions with European partners in October, early October.
14:22
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
And can I just add. Can I just add to that, Mr. Nash and I last I think it was last month, had the first development and humanitarian dialogue with the European Commission, with my counterparts, the first since Brexit. So the first in ten years. since Brexit. Yeah. Well, it's it's taken a while, but it does it does illustrate that the relationship has been reset both at the official level and at the ministerial.
14:22
James Naish
-
-
James Naish
14:23
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Well, we've at a at a technical level, we've, we've identified sort of 2 or 3 sort of themes that we are working teams are coming together to see what we could do and do more of. I think the key thing with the European Commission, of course, is as they go into their next financial perspectives next year, I mean, there is going to be, I think, quite a big reset in terms of how they interpret and set their policy on international development.
And we're going to have to see how we can where it overlaps and where it docks in, because it could look and feel quite different.
And we're going to have to see how we can where it overlaps and where it docks in, because it could look and feel quite different.
14:23
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Can I also add something, chair? That one thing I would really welcome scrutiny from the committee on is so we have these series of European meetings, the first in a decade, about which we are delighted. I'll be seeing, obviously, the European members of the G7 at the G7 development ministers meetings that are coming up on the margins of other multilateral settings, but something where I think we would welcome your scrutiny is one of the benefits of having the Development Minister be in the Fcdo is the ability to pull on the entirety of the network.
So on going questions from you about how we are using our network and our embassies in European capitals to talk to those partners about development and humanitarian concerns would be very welcome because I'm I'm very alive to the the full suite of capabilities that are now happily at my fingertips. And we need to make sure that we're we're using them and that we don't see this as a series of conversations I have in Africa or other regional ministers have with their regions for which they're responsible in the global South.
But this should absolutely be at the heart of all of our European conversations, too. And your ongoing scrutiny of that would be really welcome.
So on going questions from you about how we are using our network and our embassies in European capitals to talk to those partners about development and humanitarian concerns would be very welcome because I'm I'm very alive to the the full suite of capabilities that are now happily at my fingertips. And we need to make sure that we're we're using them and that we don't see this as a series of conversations I have in Africa or other regional ministers have with their regions for which they're responsible in the global South.
But this should absolutely be at the heart of all of our European conversations, too. And your ongoing scrutiny of that would be really welcome.
14:24
14:25
14:25
14:25
14:25
14:25
14:25
14:26
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I mean, as, as you know, under the spending review settlement where we are no longer spending in favor of last resort, it certainly doesn't come automatically, but there will have to be ongoing conversations with the Treasury. I mean, these are these are sort of accounting questions that we are very alive to and tracking closely. But as I say, we're still we're still waiting from the Treasury to give us some final figures. And at that point, we'll be able to enter dialogue.
14:26
14:26
14:26
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
Clarity on this in terms of a new government, new administration. The previous government was rhetorically committed to 0.7%, whilst actually outlining several years worth of cuts. Has that position changed? Because I've heard your commitment to it rhetorically, but I'm not sure if there's any material change in the policy position between the former prime minister and the new prime minister.
14:27
14:27
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
A little bit confused is the manifesto position is clear. But then obviously things have changed since we got into government. And there has, you know, there have been cuts to aid outlined whilst still saying kind of rhetorically, if these fiscal rules are met, we want to get there. So there's a clear there's a clear indication of intent, but what I'm not sure about is the pathway to getting there and whether that has changed at all.
Or is it actually no change from the previous Prime Minister's position?
Or is it actually no change from the previous Prime Minister's position?
14:27
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
And so if what you're asking for is is there a kind of year by year roadmap that's been published? No, that's not that's not changed. The position is that the whether the fiscal conditions allow is a judgement that will get made by the Chancellor or not made by the Treasury. It won't be made by the Fcdo. And as I say, the kind of manifesto position which I reiterated very publicly in the Guardian this week is still operable.
But ultimately the assessment of the fiscal conditions is a Treasury decision on Fcdo one.
But ultimately the assessment of the fiscal conditions is a Treasury decision on Fcdo one.
14:28
14:28
14:28
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, I would one of the things I'm discovering about working with the Foreign Secretary is because he he is a man of action, and he's got straight stuck into some very big changes in foreign policy. As I say, we had the taking over the governorship of the world Bank in the first few days. We've had the very big change in policy in Israel and Palestine in the first few weeks of Parliament returning, the Foreign Secretary will will show you his intent by what he what he does.
And we want to be judged by what we do at Unga . Next week you will see a lot of focus, I think, on development from the Foreign Secretary, which is not always been the case. I think historically my role has done a lot of the development, engagement and a lot of the diplomatic engagement around development has been done by my role. The Foreign Secretary will be absolutely leading from the front on that Unga. He will absolutely be leading from the front at that at the annuals.
The autumn, as you will know, is a very intense period of international engagement. He'll also be at Cop. So we've got three really huge multilateral moments where he will be leading the development, diplomatic effort from the front.
And we want to be judged by what we do at Unga . Next week you will see a lot of focus, I think, on development from the Foreign Secretary, which is not always been the case. I think historically my role has done a lot of the development, engagement and a lot of the diplomatic engagement around development has been done by my role. The Foreign Secretary will be absolutely leading from the front on that Unga. He will absolutely be leading from the front at that at the annuals.
The autumn, as you will know, is a very intense period of international engagement. He'll also be at Cop. So we've got three really huge multilateral moments where he will be leading the development, diplomatic effort from the front.
14:30
14:30
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Can I just add may I add just two things to that. I mean, one is deliberately we have changed our posture in terms of moving away from thinking we're an organization that can buy development results in individual countries to seeing how we can scale and how we can unlock other resources. And I think that is actually is a is a, a significant shift. And B can actually make quite a big difference. And the second is, is the minister said it's about how do we use all the convenient opportunities that we've got and we have next year, and I'm sure we'll come on to this, the G20.
And then we have the G8 after that, where we are chairing both of those. And the question is, how do we use those convening moments to make differences and demonstrate leadership that can actually make a difference in the in the, the world that we're trying to affect?
And then we have the G8 after that, where we are chairing both of those. And the question is, how do we use those convening moments to make differences and demonstrate leadership that can actually make a difference in the in the, the world that we're trying to affect?
14:30
Monica Harding
-
-
Monica Harding
I understand all that. And that is all really welcome, but should, in my opinion, be happening in any way alongside the return to 0.7%, which is legally what the House has decided that it should go back to 0.7%. And it's in your manifesto. Fiscal circumstances do not seem as if it's going to allow in this Parliament. So will you be fighting to get to 0.7% anyway in this Parliament?
14:31
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I mean, I'm very committed to the 0.7 target. I'm very committed to the good that aid does, particularly the high quality aid that we have in this country. And as I've said in the Guardian, if you have more aid, you have more impact. So that is very clearly my position, and I don't think you'd ever find a development minister who said that they wanted less of it. But at the same time, I am also a minister in the government.
That is that is dealing with multiple competing pressures, lots of which members of this committee would like to see fulfilled, I would imagine. So we we are facing a a generational moment for our national security. We have a land war in Europe and a real a real need to invest in our national defence. So as a as a member of the government, of course, I'll litigate the case for development. But equally, I don't resile in any way from our other foreign policy objectives which need investment in and which need to succeed.
That is that is dealing with multiple competing pressures, lots of which members of this committee would like to see fulfilled, I would imagine. So we we are facing a a generational moment for our national security. We have a land war in Europe and a real a real need to invest in our national defence. So as a as a member of the government, of course, I'll litigate the case for development. But equally, I don't resile in any way from our other foreign policy objectives which need investment in and which need to succeed.
14:32
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I don't think I've pitched them against each other. I've said that there are there are competing pressures in the. In the end, money can't be spent twice. We need to invest in our national security. We need to invest in our public services. We need to invest in the five securities that I've that I've laid out. I'm saying it simply as a as a fact, it's a it's a decision that the Chancellor will make about how to reconcile those various competing pressures.
But if you're asking, am I personally committed to scaled investment through Oda? Yes, but I am also personally committed to other ways that we can have an impact through the mobilisation of private capital and through the leveraging of the Mdbs. And there's a number of other tools at our disposal to secure development. And our Oda spend cannot be the only proxy for our commitment to development, in my view.
But if you're asking, am I personally committed to scaled investment through Oda? Yes, but I am also personally committed to other ways that we can have an impact through the mobilisation of private capital and through the leveraging of the Mdbs. And there's a number of other tools at our disposal to secure development. And our Oda spend cannot be the only proxy for our commitment to development, in my view.
14:33
Monica Harding
-
-
Monica Harding
Can I just ask that very specific question again? Do you think the government, in pitching defence against development, said you can't have both. Essentially, the defence budget needs to be needs to be upped and therefore that money will come from development. Do you think that's the right narrative?
14:33
14:33
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
Minister, could I put it another way? There's a reason why the most vocal defenders of humanitarian and development spend are people in the armed forces, both in this country and internationally, because they know if you use development money well, you can get upstream of the drivers that lead to conflict. So I guess the question is, will you be making that argument internally exactly as you're saying that it's not an either or.
And the two are intrinsically linked. If you want to put prevention and early intervention into this country's strategy. When it comes to our defence.
And the two are intrinsically linked. If you want to put prevention and early intervention into this country's strategy. When it comes to our defence.
14:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think I think what you're helpfully teasing out is one of the other things to which I'm committed is prevention. And I think , honestly, and I think the Department would would see this as well, that when the when the force shifts were being thought through, we probably didn't have a strong emphasis on prevention and anticipatory action, as we might have done. I'm very much hoping to bring that. You'll have seen the announcement I made yesterday around anticipatory action around El Nino.
Yes. Prevention should always be should always be our approach. But in the end, the as I say, the Chancellor has choices of nightmares because of the inheritance we face in the public finances, and I don't envy him his role for for a second, because the pressures are enormous.
Yes. Prevention should always be should always be our approach. But in the end, the as I say, the Chancellor has choices of nightmares because of the inheritance we face in the public finances, and I don't envy him his role for for a second, because the pressures are enormous.
14:35
14:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
This is such a good question. And I think every every funder, every government, every international institution in the world is really wrestling with this challenge. I think we certainly know that when conflicts are prevented, how much more efficient and effective that is? I think we've certainly got a track record of success on pre-positioned finance and so on. And our anticipatory action agenda has been relatively successful. But I think is there a is there a precise measurement that would would satisfy every skeptic and every critic? I think probably not, but I don't know.
14:36
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Well, I think there there are certain at the intervention level, yes, you can look at it. I mean, we've got good evidence on randomized controlled trials of interventions that prevent violence against women and girls. And so you can actually track that. I think the example of a couple of years ago where Somalia, after six failed rains didn't fall into a famine like it did in 2011, was purely the result of the fact that we had put in a lot of resilience activities to shore up and make people more adaptable to the shifting climate, and I think that was a direct result of our activities.
So so there are some ways you can measure it, but the overall, can you measure the intervention in country X to avoid a conflict which you don't actually know would have happened without your intervention. And that's just very difficult to do.
So so there are some ways you can measure it, but the overall, can you measure the intervention in country X to avoid a conflict which you don't actually know would have happened without your intervention. And that's just very difficult to do.
14:37
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Can I, can I come back on this chair because I, I detect a note of skepticism from you about this, which I honestly, I also shared. So when I joined the department, one of the briefings I was given was a lot of the department's work on best buys and evidence. And I, being very blunt about it, did have a degree of skepticism because one of my other priors is the process of social change in this country didn't happen because of RCTs, right? We don't have a sanitation system in this country because somebody did a program intervention that they designed, deployed, and evaluated.
We had it because as a society, we decided it wasn't acceptable, that people were dying of cholera in this country and we should invest collectively in sanitation. So I was somewhat skeptical when I received this briefing and I was blown away. I was blown away. I actually think the department's evidence and evaluation work is world class. And as I say, I, I did, I did open the folder with a with a degree of skepticism, but I think, I think the more the committee digs into the evidence work of the department, the more impressed you'll be.
That was certainly my experience. So
We had it because as a society, we decided it wasn't acceptable, that people were dying of cholera in this country and we should invest collectively in sanitation. So I was somewhat skeptical when I received this briefing and I was blown away. I was blown away. I actually think the department's evidence and evaluation work is world class. And as I say, I, I did, I did open the folder with a with a degree of skepticism, but I think, I think the more the committee digs into the evidence work of the department, the more impressed you'll be.
That was certainly my experience. So
14:38
14:38
14:38
14:38
Monica Harding
-
-
Monica Harding
14:39
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So again, people may have picked up a degree of tension between two approaches by the department, and I don't think they do exist in tension, but they they have to run concurrently. And what I mean by that is we do have a bias towards the multilateral system. And when I say we. I think that's true of both myself and the Foreign Secretary and I. I am not one of these kind of like world weary cynics that thinks you prove how intelligent and worldly wise you are by kind of dismissing the multilateral system and saying, it's all completely irrelevant.
That is, that's not my starting point at all. I think the multilateral system is under huge pressure in terms of its effectiveness, its financing, its legitimacy. It's under huge pressure. But that is all the more reason for us to buttress and defend it and to lean into it and to help reform it, to make it more effective. However, there are some there are some brakes on progress in the multilateral system. And when we feel them pulling against what we want to achieve, we will also adopt the what the department calls agile alliances.
And that's the kind of the more bespoke work to pull together the like minded partners to get what we need done, done. And I think you saw that in the work on sanctions that the Foreign Secretary announced last week. So we will do bespoke, but we will also, every single time that we can defend the legitimacy and the work of the kind of established governance of multilateral system.
That is, that's not my starting point at all. I think the multilateral system is under huge pressure in terms of its effectiveness, its financing, its legitimacy. It's under huge pressure. But that is all the more reason for us to buttress and defend it and to lean into it and to help reform it, to make it more effective. However, there are some there are some brakes on progress in the multilateral system. And when we feel them pulling against what we want to achieve, we will also adopt the what the department calls agile alliances.
And that's the kind of the more bespoke work to pull together the like minded partners to get what we need done, done. And I think you saw that in the work on sanctions that the Foreign Secretary announced last week. So we will do bespoke, but we will also, every single time that we can defend the legitimacy and the work of the kind of established governance of multilateral system.
14:40
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Can I just add to that? I mean, something that the minister may not be aware of yet, but we have a whole bunch of established, ongoing dialogues and relationships with some of our European partners and beyond. And we have the Nordic Plus, which is a partnership with, obviously, the Nordic countries. And I think it's once every two years there's a ministerial level conversation which the minister would be able to go to. I mean, at official level, I'm in at the end of next month, going to Germany to have a dialogue with my German counterpart.
And we do that with the French, and we do it with other European member states as well. So there's an ongoing engagement at the the official and the political level.
And we do that with the French, and we do it with other European member states as well. So there's an ongoing engagement at the the official and the political level.
14:41
Monica Harding
-
-
Monica Harding
That's really reassuring to know. Can I extend that? What conversations are you having with the US and US counterparts about their position on international development at the moment? Obviously, the USAID cuts are massive and having an impact right now. What will that relationship with the US change or the vibes change in terms of what the conversation you're having on how we might bring that back?
14:41
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I mean, we have a number of dialogues in the US, both on the Hill. So ministers, when they go to the US, do talk and engage with the committee structures both in the House and the Senate. And that includes issues around international development. We are, through the course of the G20, engaging with the US Treasury on some of the issues on development finance. On the development side, it's it's harder just because the changes that have gone on, so many of the established entry points that we had have disappeared.
We did build a reasonably ongoing relationship with the key US responsible official for development, but he's just been moved. So he's moved out of that job. So it's a it's a moving feast. And we are always looking for opportunities to find entry points. And when we go to the States, we try and find and do undertake engagement. And then we have the formal set pieces like the G7.
So the G7 development ministers meeting, which the minister will go to, will include the the current US counterpart, and that'll be an opportunity to build a relationship with them there.
We did build a reasonably ongoing relationship with the key US responsible official for development, but he's just been moved. So he's moved out of that job. So it's a it's a moving feast. And we are always looking for opportunities to find entry points. And when we go to the States, we try and find and do undertake engagement. And then we have the formal set pieces like the G7.
So the G7 development ministers meeting, which the minister will go to, will include the the current US counterpart, and that'll be an opportunity to build a relationship with them there.
14:42
14:43
14:43
14:43
14:43
Brian Mathew
-
-
Brian Mathew
Thank you very much. And, Minister, I believe you've got real world experience with Save the Children Fund, if I'm not mistaken. And of course, you may not be in the cabinet, but you will be with us in the comments. So that's even even better. So my sort of angle that I want to take is you've talked about the five securities which which health security, food security, climate security, economic security, human security.
Now, all of these securities, there is something that goes through every single one of them. And that is wash and a blue stream, if you like. And it's something that people understand. If you if you look at right across, you know, some understanding of, of what aid is for people get that. However, that is something that has been absolutely decimated in terms of its backing from from UK government. Now, in our report, the future of UK aid raised concerns over the level of and sorry level of government engagement with the public around aid spending.
What will your approach be to communicating the importance of aid to the public? I put it to you that actually that single aspect of Wash is perhaps something that would work, but let's hear from you.
Now, all of these securities, there is something that goes through every single one of them. And that is wash and a blue stream, if you like. And it's something that people understand. If you if you look at right across, you know, some understanding of, of what aid is for people get that. However, that is something that has been absolutely decimated in terms of its backing from from UK government. Now, in our report, the future of UK aid raised concerns over the level of and sorry level of government engagement with the public around aid spending.
What will your approach be to communicating the importance of aid to the public? I put it to you that actually that single aspect of Wash is perhaps something that would work, but let's hear from you.
14:45
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Okay. So in terms of you are you could not be more right to pick up. And indeed, the special representative on climate picked this up with me, this precise point that food security is actually there's a relationship between food security, water security and indeed energy security. And she was absolutely right to pick me up on it, as you will appreciate as a speaker, there's a there's always a trade off between how many securities you get into.
And I did fold or certainly conceptually in my mind, water and energy security fit alongside food security. So I hope, I hope you forgive me for not calling them out directly, but that doesn't mean that they don't conceptually belong together. In my sort of planning around the securities, in terms of communication with the public, my reflection. I'd be interested in reflections from the committee. My reflection is I have I have never actually encountered what would be characterised as a kind of very isolationist.
No, I don't care at all about people dying overseas. I don't care at all about my obligations to other members of our human family. That's not where the skepticism to the degree that it exists, that's not where it's coming from. Where it's coming from, is does this work? Does this work? If I believe it works, I believe we can afford it. Then I believe we should do more of it. But the skepticism comes from a place about effectiveness of our development spend, not its underlying moral purpose.
So like you, I, I will be kind of energetic, I hope and motivated to have the conversation with the public that yes, it yes, it does work. And I'm not trying to change your values. I'm trying to tell you that we, through this wonderful act of pooling our resources, do something amazing together, that we save children's lives, whether it's through access to clean water or whether it's through immunisation or whether it's access to food that families would otherwise not get.
We do something extraordinary together. And as I say, the skepticism that needs to be overcome, I think, is not whether we should do that. If it works, it's it does it work?
And I did fold or certainly conceptually in my mind, water and energy security fit alongside food security. So I hope, I hope you forgive me for not calling them out directly, but that doesn't mean that they don't conceptually belong together. In my sort of planning around the securities, in terms of communication with the public, my reflection. I'd be interested in reflections from the committee. My reflection is I have I have never actually encountered what would be characterised as a kind of very isolationist.
No, I don't care at all about people dying overseas. I don't care at all about my obligations to other members of our human family. That's not where the skepticism to the degree that it exists, that's not where it's coming from. Where it's coming from, is does this work? Does this work? If I believe it works, I believe we can afford it. Then I believe we should do more of it. But the skepticism comes from a place about effectiveness of our development spend, not its underlying moral purpose.
So like you, I, I will be kind of energetic, I hope and motivated to have the conversation with the public that yes, it yes, it does work. And I'm not trying to change your values. I'm trying to tell you that we, through this wonderful act of pooling our resources, do something amazing together, that we save children's lives, whether it's through access to clean water or whether it's through immunisation or whether it's access to food that families would otherwise not get.
We do something extraordinary together. And as I say, the skepticism that needs to be overcome, I think, is not whether we should do that. If it works, it's it does it work?
14:47
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Can I, can I just can I just add to that? Look, you're right, Mr. Matthew, about the importance and we all understand the importance of water and the fact that 25% of people don't have access to safely managed water. And all the evidence shows us that water is really important for health, safe births, etc.. I mean, it is true to say probably about six years ago, we shifted away from direct service delivery and water to focusing more on how do you improve systems and how do you leverage finance.
And we are unapologetic about that. We are doing all we can in terms of trying to leverage that resource and that finance through the other relationships that we got, like the Mdbs and the world Bank. I was particularly heartened last spring with Water Forward Initiative, where there was a global commitment to ensure that another 1 billion people getting access to water, and the World Bank's contribution to that was 400 million. So they've really massively stepped up.
So the fact that we have if we talk about attributed impact earlier in the session, I mean, if you talk about the UK's distributed impact with our increased increased contribution to the world Bank, I mean, we are putting more money into water.
And we are unapologetic about that. We are doing all we can in terms of trying to leverage that resource and that finance through the other relationships that we got, like the Mdbs and the world Bank. I was particularly heartened last spring with Water Forward Initiative, where there was a global commitment to ensure that another 1 billion people getting access to water, and the World Bank's contribution to that was 400 million. So they've really massively stepped up.
So the fact that we have if we talk about attributed impact earlier in the session, I mean, if you talk about the UK's distributed impact with our increased increased contribution to the world Bank, I mean, we are putting more money into water.
14:48
14:48
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Well, the world Bank could do a whole bunch of activities. And the fact that the world is becoming more urban and peri urban than it is rural, then the nature of what we'd have done on water and sanitation 30 years ago is very different to what we're doing now. We're trying to build sort of water systems, and they do a lot of that.
14:48
14:49
14:49
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
And we've talked a fair bit already about, I guess, the government's decision to to protect the multilateral aid spend. Obviously, an outcome of that is that the cuts have to fall somewhere, and bilateral aid has taken the big hit. I'd be interested to get your thoughts on on that, and what the likely impact of that will be to our bilateral relationships.
14:49
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I think one of the things that the committee and certainly external observers have reflected on is whether the hit in bilateral spending is going to disproportionately hit Africa. And thanks to some of the questions that were raised about that, we've dug into that quite a lot. And actually, we think our proportion to Africa is going to be pretty steady because of the imputed multilateral spend, about which obviously is Minister for Africa. I'm delighted.
I think it's also important to be realistic, though, that lots of our conversations with people in African capitals is they actually don't want to be having a conversation about aid. They want a. And I'm always I'm always sensitive on this point. I think I think we're in a world of aid and beyond, not beyond aid. And so I'm conscious that the language of Beyond Aid makes it sound like we don't think Oda has a role anymore.
And I'm very clear it does have a role. Oda is absolutely the right instrument for some things. It's not the right instrument for everything, and it's not, in my view, the right proxy for how committed you are to development. But it is absolutely the right instrument for some things. I'm not sure it is the right instrument for building bilateral relationships with African governments anymore, because of the conversations that they want to be having with us.
And there is a being completely blunt about it, there is a challenge about the fact that I have both roles because historically, as you know, the development conversation has been wrongly, in my view, but nonetheless, we should reflect it as a reality because the development conversation has been shrunk to being an older conversation. There is some skepticism in African capitals of like, are you actually the aid minister? Which I am absolutely not.
I am having a I'm having a completely equitable, businesslike foreign policy conversation with them, of which our development ambitions and our shared development ambitions might be a part and our Oda spend maybe a part of that part. But I am very clear with African ministers that I am not the aid Minister, and that is not the only conversation that they should be expecting to have with me or that I want to have with them.
I think it's also important to be realistic, though, that lots of our conversations with people in African capitals is they actually don't want to be having a conversation about aid. They want a. And I'm always I'm always sensitive on this point. I think I think we're in a world of aid and beyond, not beyond aid. And so I'm conscious that the language of Beyond Aid makes it sound like we don't think Oda has a role anymore.
And I'm very clear it does have a role. Oda is absolutely the right instrument for some things. It's not the right instrument for everything, and it's not, in my view, the right proxy for how committed you are to development. But it is absolutely the right instrument for some things. I'm not sure it is the right instrument for building bilateral relationships with African governments anymore, because of the conversations that they want to be having with us.
And there is a being completely blunt about it, there is a challenge about the fact that I have both roles because historically, as you know, the development conversation has been wrongly, in my view, but nonetheless, we should reflect it as a reality because the development conversation has been shrunk to being an older conversation. There is some skepticism in African capitals of like, are you actually the aid minister? Which I am absolutely not.
I am having a I'm having a completely equitable, businesslike foreign policy conversation with them, of which our development ambitions and our shared development ambitions might be a part and our Oda spend maybe a part of that part. But I am very clear with African ministers that I am not the aid Minister, and that is not the only conversation that they should be expecting to have with me or that I want to have with them.
14:52
14:52
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I don't I don't want to mislead you because I haven't spoken to all of my counterparts yet, but it is fair to say that in the conversations I've had with counterparts so far, this hasn't been the conversation they've wanted to have. The conversation they've wanted to have is, as I say, about a number of foreign policy concerns that they have about a number of regional conflicts, which are destabilizing their regions, and they have 100% want to have a conversation about finance and what our G20 might do to get scaled finance into their countries.
But it's just as a matter of fact, so far my conversations haven't been one in which our aid choices have been raised by African interlocutors. But that's not to say that I won't be in. You know, I've got more this afternoon and more in the weeks to come. But just as a matter of fact, it hasn't been so far.
But it's just as a matter of fact, so far my conversations haven't been one in which our aid choices have been raised by African interlocutors. But that's not to say that I won't be in. You know, I've got more this afternoon and more in the weeks to come. But just as a matter of fact, it hasn't been so far.
14:53
14:53
Tracy Gilbert
-
-
Tracy Gilbert
Just just particularly on that point, I'm just wondering what. So some of this obviously cuts across different departments and responsibilities. So I was thinking about business and trades within those conversations. I was wondering where you met. What is your interface with trade envoys from across the government, and how does how do you see that working? Is that something that could be developed further?
14:53
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I think we are still waiting for. I think there's two current trade envoys in post. So I think there's Ben Coleman for Francophone West Africa and Kate Osamor for Eastern Africa. I think we're still waiting for southern Africa trade envoy to replace Calvin Bailey, who by all accounts was doing an absolutely outstanding job. So I have already been in conversation with the department about wanting to have the trade envoys in when we're back up to a full complement of three.
I've already discussed with the minister, the new Minister of Trade, Lord Sarwar, about how we might deal with some of the conversations he's been having in the Gulf, that we might want to do joint work on business relationships with Africa. So there's certainly a lot of interest in this debate now, not certainly a lot of interest in debate on working with us on Africa, but I think it would be a fair reflection to say that the potential of Africa has not been at the top of this list, but I think there is a desire to to move it up.
And there's certainly a lot of openness from the colleagues I've spoken to.
I've already discussed with the minister, the new Minister of Trade, Lord Sarwar, about how we might deal with some of the conversations he's been having in the Gulf, that we might want to do joint work on business relationships with Africa. So there's certainly a lot of interest in this debate now, not certainly a lot of interest in debate on working with us on Africa, but I think it would be a fair reflection to say that the potential of Africa has not been at the top of this list, but I think there is a desire to to move it up.
And there's certainly a lot of openness from the colleagues I've spoken to.
14:54
14:54
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
Just slightly, but I'm sure you'll know from your previous life outside of politics, often a pound can be spent more effectively at grassroots than it can be by very large organisations. And yet, obviously with the Fcdo tendering process, often that excludes a lot of smaller charities and local organisations from accessing that money. I'm just wondering if you if you could speak to that and what and what what the Fcdo is going to do to ensure that we do get money right down to the grassroots?
14:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
That's a great question. And I don't know if you want to talk about this. Certainly when I was in Abercrombie House, which I, I think I was able to get done in my first month in post, the colleagues who work on those partnerships in Abercrombie House are very, very, very alive to the very real risks of squeezing out smaller organisations. And they impressed that on me, that they were alive to the risk and wanted me to be alive to the risk.
But so far I haven't. I haven't commissioned any advice on that.
But so far I haven't. I haven't commissioned any advice on that.
14:55
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Yeah, I mean, we're looking hard at that because we recognise that if you've got major reporting and design requirements on a project, you're just going to ensure that small organisations fall over because they can't do it. If you've got to ask them to submit in English and not their local language, they're not going to be able to do it. So we're thinking about how can you make the the the program requirements and the tendering requirements more proportionate for the size of the organisation? How do we get to a point where we just do due diligence once and not multiple times? How do we make that more that simpler? So we're we're looking at that because for far too long, we've been an organisation that basically squeezed out small and micro organisations just because of the way we do our business.
And that needs to change.
And that needs to change.
14:56
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
Because one of the ways that can be done is through good international NGOs on the ground, who can often provide a useful intermediary between between the local and the donor. And indeed, the Fcdo has described NGOs as important partners with strong development expertise. So how do you plan to engage with UK NGOs in. And I suppose, how do you plan to use them in this capacity as well?
14:57
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Well, the Minister may well have a better perspective than me on this, but I mean, quite a lot of the civil society organisations in the UK are going through this question right now in terms of the trade off between delivery and being a capacity building organisation, and we have got, with Comic Relief, a ten year programme where we're looking at across three countries, how can we build local organisations and local charities and NGOs to be help in terms of service provision? So we're looking at that through that program, and we've got some examples in a number of countries around the world where we are trying to engage directly with local organisations rather than going through third parties, because then you just add a whole bunch of additional costs to that.
So this this is a big question if you really do want to drive a higher proportion of your funding going through local organisations, as USAID tried to do about five, ten years ago, which they actually didn't succeed, but they made some progress. You've really got to not necessarily use third parties, but just have a look at your own systems and procedures.
So this this is a big question if you really do want to drive a higher proportion of your funding going through local organisations, as USAID tried to do about five, ten years ago, which they actually didn't succeed, but they made some progress. You've really got to not necessarily use third parties, but just have a look at your own systems and procedures.
14:58
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
And if I could share, just come in on sort of my approach to civil society. And I'd like to say that this was consistent when I was in civil society. So this isn't this isn't since I've changed seat, I've always thought the relationship between government and civil society should be about real things. And you should have a conversation that's substantive about where you agree, where you disagree, what each side knows that the other doesn't know, and what you might be able to do together.
And I know in times past, there has been a desire to like, how big is the civil society team? Is there a government civil society strategy? And honestly, I don't think that's I don't think that's the test for me. The test is are we convening the relevant expert bits of civil society, either because they're expert from a research perspective or from a programme delivery perspective? Are we convening the relevant bits of civil society on absolutely equal terms with other partners who are feeding in and indeed on equal terms with our own internal analysis? Are we convening people about real things on which they are well placed to contribute? So I, I wouldn't want anyone to think the fact that I haven't had a sort of a sector meeting to be read as a signal of the value I place on civil society voices, it should be read as a signal of the value I place on sort of choreographed set piece meetings.
I don't think choreographed set piece meetings are the best way to get very busy people as as civil society representatives often are, it's not the best way to get the best out of them. So I'm not in the business of doing lots of bilateral meetings to hear about people's organisational agendas. For the most part, no other organisational agendas, and they can write to me. And I'm not in the business of doing set piece, choreographed, lowest common denominator meetings.
I want to engage very intensively with civil society experts about the the biggest priorities for them on, as I say, on on very meaty topics where there's an urgency about their contribution.
And I know in times past, there has been a desire to like, how big is the civil society team? Is there a government civil society strategy? And honestly, I don't think that's I don't think that's the test for me. The test is are we convening the relevant expert bits of civil society, either because they're expert from a research perspective or from a programme delivery perspective? Are we convening the relevant bits of civil society on absolutely equal terms with other partners who are feeding in and indeed on equal terms with our own internal analysis? Are we convening people about real things on which they are well placed to contribute? So I, I wouldn't want anyone to think the fact that I haven't had a sort of a sector meeting to be read as a signal of the value I place on civil society voices, it should be read as a signal of the value I place on sort of choreographed set piece meetings.
I don't think choreographed set piece meetings are the best way to get very busy people as as civil society representatives often are, it's not the best way to get the best out of them. So I'm not in the business of doing lots of bilateral meetings to hear about people's organisational agendas. For the most part, no other organisational agendas, and they can write to me. And I'm not in the business of doing set piece, choreographed, lowest common denominator meetings.
I want to engage very intensively with civil society experts about the the biggest priorities for them on, as I say, on on very meaty topics where there's an urgency about their contribution.
15:00
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
Jessica, you a little bit on detail. So I would hope that you would go further than civil society down to the actual individuals that are living the issue that we're trying to address. So, you know, it might be a fisherwoman who has got no fish stock or the ability to buy a boat to go out further. Because I'm, I'm concerned that both civil society, local localism are becoming phrases. And, and I wonder how you might be able to get to that level of talking to the actual people that are directly impacted.
And one of the things that. Well, one of the things that I've seen, which has always blown me away, is the apologies if I pronounced it wrong, the Chilean scholars. So for the investment that we make in people that we think are the brightest and the best, they then become the CEOs or the government ministers that we have the relationship with. But also where I've seen in country teams engage with the fisherwoman.
She then tells them the solution. She then becomes the entrepreneur. I mean, we met a woman recently who set up an egg production business, and she's now employing 1000 women in it. So, so I think if we're if we are able to get to those people, they do know the solutions. One of the things this committee for various politics have been parliaments has been pushing is the concept of the Fcdo office in the country actually having those business skills to to be a mentor, to help people through even a simplified process, still a quite a complex process if you don't speak the language.
And if there was a willingness to put microfinance, you know, like thousands of pounds rather than tens of thousands of pounds into projects, whether they be pilots or investments or just tokens of goodwill. Because even if you're talking to civil society, for me, that's still an organized group that That's still an organized group that knows how to lobby and engage and come to a round table. And are you do you have any appetite to .
Go
And one of the things that. Well, one of the things that I've seen, which has always blown me away, is the apologies if I pronounced it wrong, the Chilean scholars. So for the investment that we make in people that we think are the brightest and the best, they then become the CEOs or the government ministers that we have the relationship with. But also where I've seen in country teams engage with the fisherwoman.
She then tells them the solution. She then becomes the entrepreneur. I mean, we met a woman recently who set up an egg production business, and she's now employing 1000 women in it. So, so I think if we're if we are able to get to those people, they do know the solutions. One of the things this committee for various politics have been parliaments has been pushing is the concept of the Fcdo office in the country actually having those business skills to to be a mentor, to help people through even a simplified process, still a quite a complex process if you don't speak the language.
And if there was a willingness to put microfinance, you know, like thousands of pounds rather than tens of thousands of pounds into projects, whether they be pilots or investments or just tokens of goodwill. Because even if you're talking to civil society, for me, that's still an organized group that That's still an organized group that knows how to lobby and engage and come to a round table. And are you do you have any appetite to .
Go
15:02
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
more granular, to use that annoying expression? So I might let Nick come back on the kind of use of money in. posts through the network. But on forgive me, chair, when I was when was talking about the kind of the set piece. choreographed bits, it was more about UK civil society. And actually, one of the reasons I've not done that so far is, is actually precisely because of the challenge that you raised, that I am reluctant to.
privilege people who happen to live in London and who happen to be able to get to the Fcdo. I'm reluctant to privilege those voices over voices in country, or indeed voices in other bits of our own country. So that that was I'm sorry if I gave a misleading impression there. That was in answer to Sam's question about UK civil society. engagement on the . Getting to hear from people.
privilege people who happen to live in London and who happen to be able to get to the Fcdo. I'm reluctant to privilege those voices over voices in country, or indeed voices in other bits of our own country. So that that was I'm sorry if I gave a misleading impression there. That was in answer to Sam's question about UK civil society. engagement on the . Getting to hear from people.
15:03
15:03
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I was very struck in my. Ethiopia visit because I have asked that in each time I do a visit, time is programmed in with children and young people and with women. and I was very struck by two things in Ethiopia visit. One was I visited essentially a one stop shop for survivors of sexual violence that if that was available in this country, I think we would be delighted to see.
It was a really. extraordinary place where there is physical and, if necessary, reconstructive surgery available. There is psychosocial support available. There were embedded specialist police.
It was a really. extraordinary place where there is physical and, if necessary, reconstructive surgery available. There is psychosocial support available. There were embedded specialist police.
15:03
15:03
15:04
15:04
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I met a number of women who had there's a sort of a social. protection system that can scale in response to climate shock. And they had received social. protection and had received precisely. And I know we were talking about organisations rather than people, but had received brilliant business mentoring. So it's like when you're the receipt of this social.
15:04
15:04
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
will give you a bit of start up capital. We'll give you business mentoring support. You're only conditions are you have to complete a business plan in a certain period of time. And they'd all gone on to create successful businesses, including the business that was catering the session that we were having. They were fantastic. And I wanted to reflect that , partly because, like you, I have a deep hunger to actually speak to people who theoretically the work is being done in partnership with, but also it gives me the chance to put on record that I think social protection is a is a very, very powerful tool of development, that the development community more generally doesn't speak about enough.
I don't think so. I really welcome ongoing dialogue with the . Committee
I don't think so. I really welcome ongoing dialogue with the . Committee
15:05
15:05
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
it's some of the best work I've seen and it's supported by the UK. Thank you very much. Can I just add to that? So I would deconflict two things. One is whether it's the right thing to do and then second, how best to do it. So 30 years ago I would when in Oda, as was then, I have sat down with. communities and co-design projects that we then. implemented as we scaled up our funding and as we move to.
15:05
15:05
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
became a wholesaler, not a retailer. We basically worked through third parties because we just couldn't do anything else. And we have kept that model ever since, and we frankly don't have the. resources to actually run projects directly. Now, all of us, the minister, myself included, when I go to in country, I will sit down with people and talk to them about what their needs are and how things are affecting their lives, and that's part of what we need to do, but we just do not have the resources to be able to do that kind of micro direct engagement and co-design and delivery and.
15:06
15:06
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
Yes, back to you. Do you need to? Well, because that's where all the the layering, the. bureaucracy and indeed the costs come from. So I'm incredibly grateful that my town's got some pride in place money and we're doing micro grants for under £1,000. And yes, we're quite robust about asking, you know, what you're going to do, why you're going to do it, what the benefits are going to be. And then we're just giving them £1,000.
And it there was all the hesitancy around the cash transfers. And then we . Actually did
And it there was all the hesitancy around the cash transfers. And then we . Actually did
15:06
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
it and trusted people. And it's like, wow, it's transformative. Well, this this is a government that is prepared to look more readily at insourcing compared to outsourcing. If you can make a value for money judgment on that. And we we could in some and in some cases, we have actually looked at that and made judgments that we would do it ourselves. But these are quite big projects. But where you're dealing with micro projects, where you are dealing with hundreds of.
15:07
15:07
15:07
15:07
David Taylor
-
-
David Taylor
structured will be able to do it. David. Thank you. Chair, I just want to bring us back to the previous question around public awareness for international development. And last night in your one of your arguments in your in your wonderful speech, was that people cannot feel expected to feel. concerned for a stranger if they've had no love from their neighbour. And I just want to give you the opportunity to elaborate.
You put down a challenge to the international development sector to lay to deepen their their roots in local communities. I wanted to give you the opportunity to to elaborate on what you meant by that and some sort of practical examples of that. But secondly, related to that, you will know, because we've spoken about it, that sort of passion for development education, because I do think that that is fundamental to as well to rebuilding support for international development.
And I note that the our government has brought in a new GCSE on natural.
You put down a challenge to the international development sector to lay to deepen their their roots in local communities. I wanted to give you the opportunity to to elaborate on what you meant by that and some sort of practical examples of that. But secondly, related to that, you will know, because we've spoken about it, that sort of passion for development education, because I do think that that is fundamental to as well to rebuilding support for international development.
And I note that the our government has brought in a new GCSE on natural.
15:08
15:08
15:08
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Any thoughts on that would be very welcome. Lovely. Thank you. So one of the one of the things I was trying to get at last night is, I think for far too long, there has been this sort of suggestion that there's, there's a, there's a sort of place called the Poor World that's a completely different. place inhabited by completely different kinds of people to whom we either owe a benevolent obligation of. charity .
, or we still owe an. obligation of justice. And it is an obligation that we owe to them. And there is still in that framework and us and them. And actually, one of the things I was trying to say last night is there's just us, there's just us. There's just the billions of people that are alive at the same time on this very, very small and very fragile planet. And we owe obligations to each other and those .
Obligations. Whilst your experience of poverty or. crisis may be much more intense in other countries, they are nonetheless not.
, or we still owe an. obligation of justice. And it is an obligation that we owe to them. And there is still in that framework and us and them. And actually, one of the things I was trying to say last night is there's just us, there's just us. There's just the billions of people that are alive at the same time on this very, very small and very fragile planet. And we owe obligations to each other and those .
Obligations. Whilst your experience of poverty or. crisis may be much more intense in other countries, they are nonetheless not.
15:09
15:09
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:11
15:11
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think continuing to fund efforts to engage the British public is a really. legitimate and wise use of your. scaled funding. And it was it was a plea, really, to those people who have institutional power to make sure that they aren't leaving behind a UK audience. But actually, it was just a plea to all of us as. citizens that we have to we have to develop our muscles of.
solidarity from the minute we get up to the minute we go to bed. And that might mean shopping for a neighbour, and it might mean joining our local social club, and it might mean joining the local co-op, and it might mean joining a local football team every bit as much as it means giving support to people overseas. And I was absolutely thrilled that someone shared the speech earlier and said, I've read this and I've. decided that my two tasks for today is I'm going to give some money to maternity hospitals in Gaza, and I'm off to join my local social club.
Nice that that was my hope for it.
solidarity from the minute we get up to the minute we go to bed. And that might mean shopping for a neighbour, and it might mean joining our local social club, and it might mean joining the local co-op, and it might mean joining a local football team every bit as much as it means giving support to people overseas. And I was absolutely thrilled that someone shared the speech earlier and said, I've read this and I've. decided that my two tasks for today is I'm going to give some money to maternity hospitals in Gaza, and I'm off to join my local social club.
Nice that that was my hope for it.
15:12
15:12
15:12
15:12
15:12
15:12
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think you're talking about development education as in in schools domestically. So yes, GP is coming up and we can talk about that shortly. But on development education, I can't give you any promises about what will happen from any conversations I have with DfE, but I'm certainly very happy to have them because I say the representations I've had from people who there's lots of organisations, as you all know, Oxfam, Save the Children, Cafod who've got a really long track record and development in education have scaled back their funding in it, have seen the consequences of scaling back their funding in it, and now have started doing some really interesting pilots, the results of which have been really promising.
So I say I find those representations very persuasive. So I'm very happy to go and have conversations with DfE, but I can't promise on their behalf what will happen. Yes. So let's chat GP. So as you know, the UK has traditionally been a very strong supporter of of GPE and of education cannot wait. We have been in ongoing discussions with GPE and indeed I met the executive director last week or the week before.
I am attending the.
So I say I find those representations very persuasive. So I'm very happy to go and have conversations with DfE, but I can't promise on their behalf what will happen. Yes. So let's chat GP. So as you know, the UK has traditionally been a very strong supporter of of GPE and of education cannot wait. We have been in ongoing discussions with GPE and indeed I met the executive director last week or the week before.
I am attending the.
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:14
15:14
15:14
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
This committee has been very, very focused on the restructure that's been going on at Fcdo. And whilst we understand the reasons for it, we've been very concerned. That basically was the horse being put before the cart in terms of direction of travel and the number of people that you would need and the skills that you would need to do that. So I wonder, Minister, I know that you're reasonably new in post. What steps have you taken to assure yourself that you will have the.
skills in the team . To go.
skills in the team . To go.
15:14
15:14
15:15
15:15
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
There are there's sort of two questions that they've had. I think one is about the. capability in the. organisation and whether that is at the level we need. Personally, I am reasonably satisfied, as one can be with the level of information I have and the time that I've been in the role, and I'm reasonably satisfied that we've. retained what we need to deliver the programme of work that we have. But they've also had a set of questions that are honestly more about culture than capability and capacity more strictly, which is people have wanted.
reassurance that development is still of value to the organisation. And honestly, I would like to think that we've just had the announcement of the new permanent secretary, who comes from a different background. We have, so we will have two from that side of the House. And I say the Foreign Secretary could not have been clearer about the priority that he puts on development, and I hope in my conversations with them, my appointment has been somewhat.
reassuring that they have someone who knows and understands and valued and has always valued their work. So I hope those conversations with colleagues have been reassuring for them. They certainly been reassuring for me that once we've talked through the kind of degree of capability that we have and certainly the cultural . Primacy that
reassurance that development is still of value to the organisation. And honestly, I would like to think that we've just had the announcement of the new permanent secretary, who comes from a different background. We have, so we will have two from that side of the House. And I say the Foreign Secretary could not have been clearer about the priority that he puts on development, and I hope in my conversations with them, my appointment has been somewhat.
reassuring that they have someone who knows and understands and valued and has always valued their work. So I hope those conversations with colleagues have been reassuring for them. They certainly been reassuring for me that once we've talked through the kind of degree of capability that we have and certainly the cultural . Primacy that
15:16
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
15:16
15:16
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
seek to give them stability, really? So I hope colleagues internally will have heard what I said at the beginning about the areas where there is continuity. I think it's also important to say that one of the. things for my. trips that I've been really explicit about is. telegraphing what we are doing back into the UK is, I think, unbelievably important for the taxpayer. It's unbelievably important for parliamentary colleagues.
It's unbelievably important across Whitehall. But I think it's also unbelievably important for our colleagues who are toiling in some cases, in. unbelievably difficult circumstances. I think it's important for them to know that I want to be a Tribune. I want to be a platform for their. stories to be told. I was I was unbelievably moved and struck by the conditions in which our colleagues in Somalia are operating. I know I couldn't do it, and as I say, the kind of the.
psychological resilience that is required and the raw physical courage that is required to to. operate in Mogadishu, I was I was really humbled by. And so I think it's important that I am able to telegraph that back and to reaffirm the importance of their work across Parliament and across Whitehall and to the public. The second thing I'd say about that is I've been very. explicit with the network.
As you imagine, there's lots of travel bids that have been coming in. I think morale is partly my job and that degree, and I am very happy to go to posts for no reason other than they are difficult and that people there are labouring under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. So I hope I've telegraphed across the. organisation that I take my responsibilities as an employer very. seriously and I'm. I say I've been awed, so impressed by the .
Quality
It's unbelievably important across Whitehall. But I think it's also unbelievably important for our colleagues who are toiling in some cases, in. unbelievably difficult circumstances. I think it's important for them to know that I want to be a Tribune. I want to be a platform for their. stories to be told. I was I was unbelievably moved and struck by the conditions in which our colleagues in Somalia are operating. I know I couldn't do it, and as I say, the kind of the.
psychological resilience that is required and the raw physical courage that is required to to. operate in Mogadishu, I was I was really humbled by. And so I think it's important that I am able to telegraph that back and to reaffirm the importance of their work across Parliament and across Whitehall and to the public. The second thing I'd say about that is I've been very. explicit with the network.
As you imagine, there's lots of travel bids that have been coming in. I think morale is partly my job and that degree, and I am very happy to go to posts for no reason other than they are difficult and that people there are labouring under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. So I hope I've telegraphed across the. organisation that I take my responsibilities as an employer very. seriously and I'm. I say I've been awed, so impressed by the .
Quality
15:18
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
of officials that we have. And I think letting them feel valued is a huge part of my job in all of our travels and in all of our enquiries. I've never been. dazzled by the staff. Fcdo have at every level they. They really are exceptional people, which is why it's so painful that they have had a very. turbulent six years.
15:18
15:19
15:19
15:19
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
But I think that the posts are managing their own restructures. So one of the concerns that we have as a committee is how do those two things marry up? Because of course, it takes a long time and a lot of investment to get to an. ambassador or a director level. And how is that sort of pipeline of. skills being . Linked
15:19
15:19
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
restructures are happening separately? Yeah. So you're right to say that the restructuring in the UK has been in advance of the. restructuring overseas. So we launched the new. structure last Monday. So people have now moved into their jobs and we're just filling the remaining jobs. So people are sort of feeling at least some stability in terms of that structure. The overseas.
network is always was going to be a second phase. And part of that is to ask ourselves the question what the laydown should look like and what the balance should be between the particular regions and within regions, the particular posts. And we haven't actually finalised the decisions on that as we do. I mean, we've given some. indicative signals to the business about what the what they can expect in terms of the future and what the broad shifts might be.
And people are starting to look at, well, how would they structure. themselves under that scenario? We will then take receipt of those. proposals and do exactly what you're concerned about. Stand back and ask ourselves, well, do we have the capability here to deliver on the shifts that we want to deliver and on the and on the allocations that we've laid out? And does it make sense in terms of a workforce model where we've got a rotational model, where people come back to the UK and then go back overseas? So we are very conscious of that, and we need to take stock of that.
I think in terms of the rotational model, the problem we've had in the past is that over the last ten years, the number of UK based staff, UK based staff who are in the UK has grown. 40% and overseas it hasn't grown at all. So we've ended up with far more people chasing a small number of jobs. And
network is always was going to be a second phase. And part of that is to ask ourselves the question what the laydown should look like and what the balance should be between the particular regions and within regions, the particular posts. And we haven't actually finalised the decisions on that as we do. I mean, we've given some. indicative signals to the business about what the what they can expect in terms of the future and what the broad shifts might be.
And people are starting to look at, well, how would they structure. themselves under that scenario? We will then take receipt of those. proposals and do exactly what you're concerned about. Stand back and ask ourselves, well, do we have the capability here to deliver on the shifts that we want to deliver and on the and on the allocations that we've laid out? And does it make sense in terms of a workforce model where we've got a rotational model, where people come back to the UK and then go back overseas? So we are very conscious of that, and we need to take stock of that.
I think in terms of the rotational model, the problem we've had in the past is that over the last ten years, the number of UK based staff, UK based staff who are in the UK has grown. 40% and overseas it hasn't grown at all. So we've ended up with far more people chasing a small number of jobs. And
15:21
15:21
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
What reassurance have you got to the staff that are there. So I'm going to be there at least once a quarter. hopefully more substantially. As some colleagues will know, I'm substantially based in Scotland. I live in Scotland, my family are in Scotland, so I'm hoping to be there. As I say, it was really important to me to get there very quickly and to be able to offer them reassurance face to face, that they are .
Completely
Completely
15:22
15:22
15:22
15:22
15:22
15:22
15:22
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Week and I would I would. differentiate not to diminish in any way. Role, but I would differentiate between its legally mandated role. It was in our manifesto, like the role of Eisai is of course really important. And there is the wider. transparency agenda to which I'm incredibly committed. And I hope you have taken from my appearance here today.
15:23
15:23
15:23
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
really is. And every, honestly, every pound that we spend and every hour of either official or ministerial time has to be maximized for it has to be optimized for impact. So I very much welcome their scrutiny. I'm delighted to meet with the Chief Commissioner and reaffirm for her my commitment to their work. I am I am relatively confident after that meeting that they can continue to fulfil their function, but I say they won't be the only.
driver of our. transparency and therefore of our performance. I'm committed to the committee, I'm committed to parliamentary scrutiny. I'm committed to being as proactive as we possibly can be .
driver of our. transparency and therefore of our performance. I'm committed to the committee, I'm committed to parliamentary scrutiny. I'm committed to being as proactive as we possibly can be .
15:23
15:24
15:24
15:24
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
is, and what you want it to achieve? So I think Nick might want to come in on this. Likewise, when I was kind of briefed on it, it was it, I was I was trying to get my head round sort of tangibly what it does for me, for me, the measure is the level of demand on them, and the level of demand on them is already incredibly high. So colleagues in country value what they do and find this a very helpful source of technical expertise.
I don't know what you would say the one line. corporate explanation of what they're doing, but for me, what they're doing is meeting .
I don't know what you would say the one line. corporate explanation of what they're doing, but for me, what they're doing is meeting .
15:25
15:25
15:25
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Nine of these communities of expertise, some more every time we talk to well, well, because every time we look at it, we have more areas that we think, well, actually, this would be a good place to build some capacity because it's a real live challenge for the countries that we are working with. And we there are certain things we want. So my ideal is you've got these communities of . Expertise,
15:26
15:26
15:26
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Living library come research. Well, it the the reality is they. There isn't one standard model because some of them have been basically in existence for quite some time. And they've, they've built their own operating model. Some are being built from scratch. And we've got to think about how do we have a balance between internal. capability and then drawing on. capabilities that may be within the UK government or in the private sector, or the City of London, or consultancy firms or research bodies.
And it will differ according to the the area. And we have asked ourselves, do we do we basically bring one brand, one consistent approach to all of this? And that is something that we are, if I'm . Honest,
And it will differ according to the the area. And we have asked ourselves, do we do we basically bring one brand, one consistent approach to all of this? And that is something that we are, if I'm . Honest,
15:26
15:27
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
We know what we're doing. But actually bringing it into effect is quite tricky to do. So there's a, for example, a, a new minister in Mali who goes to our office says, I'm really interested in drawing private finance into education. How do I do that? They would then get in touch with the relevant . Centre,
15:27
15:27
15:27
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
local body and use their own resources, funded something like that ten years ago in deed, the challenge of this is going to be how do you scale it? So as we bring these communities of expertise in, I mean, some are only at the moment sort of covering five, six, seven countries, but then you want to expand it over the course of sort of 2 or 3 years. And it could well be that one of our offices in the Sahel asked for support.
And actually we haven't got the bandwidth to do it. I mean, that's that's the reality. Then we may. deliberately see to ask if there could be somebody locally who could support that or regionally who could support it. So yes, that's the concept that somebody needs support and we are nimble and agile . Enough, and we
And actually we haven't got the bandwidth to do it. I mean, that's that's the reality. Then we may. deliberately see to ask if there could be somebody locally who could support that or regionally who could support it. So yes, that's the concept that somebody needs support and we are nimble and agile . Enough, and we
15:28
15:28
15:28
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
We were looking at a lot more. Trust with our sort of. ambassadorial director teams to spend the money as they saw fit in their country. Then it seemed as though the centre for communities for. expertise were effectively replicating the centrally managed funds model, or making the decision about where the money is gone. Where has this ended up? Because I think we were quite supportive.
15:28
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
That post ought to have the. responsibility and the trust. So it's a mixed model. So you do have posts with their own resources. As you've seen from the allocations. Some don't have anything at all, and there'll be more reliant on asking the centre whether there's resource that they could draw upon. So you could do one or the other. We did in one of our early communities expertise models actually say, okay, we've got this money, let's give it to the.
countries and let them then see how they want to spend it and demand the resource and run the resource themselves. But actually, a lot of countries don't want to do that. They don't want the transaction costs of having to run it. They'd rather it was centralised. And frankly, it's more efficient to have somebody at the centre who can draw on and know where the resource and the .
countries and let them then see how they want to spend it and demand the resource and run the resource themselves. But actually, a lot of countries don't want to do that. They don't want the transaction costs of having to run it. They'd rather it was centralised. And frankly, it's more efficient to have somebody at the centre who can draw on and know where the resource and the .
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
As much as we can basically shut some of the centrally managed programs because they are and can distort some of the activities that are going on in country in some cases, like our research programme, which has actually been cut by 50% as well. They do. actually fund through. universities .. A lot of projects in country because ultimately that's where everything happens. It happens in the country. And the challenge for us has always been, how do we ensure that our heads of mission know what is going on and how do we bring that knowledge to them? So we have built.
into our centrally managed. activities process, where in effect, it's a double lock. You can't do it unless the. country office know what's going on, and they've got an opportunity to comment on it. Otherwise it doesn't get funded. So there are ways where we're bringing. institutionalizing the .
into our centrally managed. activities process, where in effect, it's a double lock. You can't do it unless the. country office know what's going on, and they've got an opportunity to comment on it. Otherwise it doesn't get funded. So there are ways where we're bringing. institutionalizing the .
15:31
15:31
15:31
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Commitment to Ukraine evolving over the coming years? I think the first thing to say at the outset is I'm proud of it. I have dug into it a fair amount with our colleagues in Kyiv, because it is a big. allocation and we shouldn't and won't shy away from the fact that it's a big allocation. But because it's a big allocation of a shrinking pot, it was very important for me to hear first hand from colleagues in Kyiv what it's being used for and its impact, and I was.
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:32
15:32
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Could could I add to that? So I'd say two things on that. One is the the really big sums we're putting into Ukraine are the. $5 billion worth of. guarantees to fund their fiscal support. And if they if you can't fund the fiscal side of the government, then that is war losing. And they really it is a serious as that , and that we are looking at what our next phase of support could be to the fiscal side, because that is particularly important.
So I don't see that particularly evolving because that is so central and fundamental. When I went to.
So I don't see that particularly evolving because that is so central and fundamental. When I went to.
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:33
15:33
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
The reality is the war is still going on and we do want to do that, but the humanitarian need is just as high as it has been, and I would expect that to continue whilst we are through the investment summits that we're doing, looking at how the broader investment work can be progressed, and we're doing quite a lot of support to small enterprises, small.
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Position regarding the release of those funds? So I'm going to speak. carefully here because of the importance of getting the language right. And we are. 100% clear that the proceeds of . this fund urgently need to be released. Our our priority is, is doing everything that is. necessary legally to get them released and to get them into the hands of, of vulnerable people. We, as you will know, one has been reported to Parliament.
The previous government did strive to reach an agreement with Mr. Abramovich to transfer the. proceeds of the fund to humanitarian needs in Ukraine. He committed to meet that donation over four years ago that four years we've waited for that commitment to be fulfilled, that hasn't happened. The UK government's position was we would make that legally possible through the creation of an ofsi licence. We did that in.
December last year. There there can't be further delays. So the government is urgently exploring what further. action we can take to release the funds. including preparing for a possible legal case. You'll appreciate, given that, I won't want to say much more on that, but I can assure you of our absolute commitment .
The previous government did strive to reach an agreement with Mr. Abramovich to transfer the. proceeds of the fund to humanitarian needs in Ukraine. He committed to meet that donation over four years ago that four years we've waited for that commitment to be fulfilled, that hasn't happened. The UK government's position was we would make that legally possible through the creation of an ofsi licence. We did that in.
December last year. There there can't be further delays. So the government is urgently exploring what further. action we can take to release the funds. including preparing for a possible legal case. You'll appreciate, given that, I won't want to say much more on that, but I can assure you of our absolute commitment .
15:35
15:35
15:36
15:36
David Taylor
-
-
David Taylor
Humanitarian aid, in some cases. vehicles from the UK to Ukraine, sometimes driving them themselves. And it's an issue I've raised in Parliament multiple times. And Minister Doherty was very helpful in his previous role in facilitating meeting with an Fcdo official in the humanitarian team around this. I raised it earlier this week in in the West meetings statement to do with the trying to get a meeting with an Mod official, because there's a bit of a overlap between some of the groups who are donating purely humanitarian aid, and some of them that are donating old vehicles that, frankly, soldiers can use.
But either way, there's, I think, a little bit of joint work that would be really helpful between the Fcdo and the Mod, just to make these guys lives easier.
But either way, there's, I think, a little bit of joint work that would be really helpful between the Fcdo and the Mod, just to make these guys lives easier.
15:36
David Taylor
-
-
David Taylor
Delays on the Polish border, nitty gritty issues sort of are holding up these these convoys and demoralizing the guys a bit and the girls a bit. And even just helping some of these charities get hold of old. ambulances or fire trucks, or take them from the government estate if they're no longer used. Making that process smoother would be really helpful. So it's just a plea to, if it's possible to.
We had one, we had a couple of meetings with an Fcdo official and then things just slowed down a little bit. It'd be fantastic if we could pick it up again, perhaps jointly with an . An
We had one, we had a couple of meetings with an Fcdo official and then things just slowed down a little bit. It'd be fantastic if we could pick it up again, perhaps jointly with an . An
15:37
15:37
15:37
15:37
15:37
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
Thank you very much. Yes. Similar really through the Council of Europe. I sit on the network for Ukrainian children and our chair is is a. Ukrainian member of Parliament and was talking to me about just the simple challenges that schools face. And I think reflect on, on, on your point earlier about the sort of solidarity of the British public. And as David has just said, this is something we're seeing in relation to Ukraine.
We wanted to explore together something as simple as linking schools, having partner schools where they can meet each other, pen friends, fundraise. Is that the sort of thing that the government could look at supporting to help unlock the natural charity of the British public, of people who want to give more, but but don't . Always
We wanted to explore together something as simple as linking schools, having partner schools where they can meet each other, pen friends, fundraise. Is that the sort of thing that the government could look at supporting to help unlock the natural charity of the British public, of people who want to give more, but but don't . Always
15:38
15:38
15:38
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think Save the Children have done some very interesting work. piloting modern school, twinning of the sort that lots of us grew up with. They're piloting how you do that in a digital age, and I've been very impressed by the results of that so far. And I think one of the requests from lots of colleagues who come from a development education background is what role can posts have . In.
15:38
15:38
Brian Mathew
-
-
Brian Mathew
something we can take away. Thank you. Brian. Okay. I think I could probably say all of us, if not most of us in this room and certainly across the across the House of Commons have been very pleased to, to, to see what the Foreign Secretary has said about what's happening in Israel and stopping trade with the illegal settlements. Now, I want to ask a rather hard nosed.
15:39
15:39
Brian Mathew
-
-
Brian Mathew
But you may want to. I tried to ask this yesterday, actually in the chamber, but it it we didn't get an answer. But you may have seen this headline. It's back from April this year. Foreign office shuts unit tracking. potential law breaches by Israel. This refers to the I cell dealing with the Middle East.
15:39
15:39
15:39
Brian Mathew
-
-
Brian Mathew
Which was a unit, is a unit which had a massive database of all of the dreadful things that have been going on. But so from that, the question is how do you expect the government's change in approach on Israel to affect change? And I think this is probably a good place to start, because if the government is blind as to what's going on there, because funds have been cut from these. This cell and from the centre for.
15:40
15:40
15:40
15:40
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
more to say on that in coming days. But, Nick, I might defer to you on the size of the team in the cell. Yes. So the originally that I cell was spun out of the the what do we call it, the export control joint unit. So we had a, we do have an export control unit. And then we spun out the isle cell specifically to track the. The Israel situation.
And it's now gone back. into the export control unit. So it hasn't disappeared. The 21 staff are now working back in the export control unit. So there is this. understanding and. misunderstanding that we've stopped doing the work. We haven't. The work continues. We're still doing it. They're just sitting somewhere else in the structure. On the centre for Information Resilience. We still have access to their.
reports and the we. We aren't only. relying on that source of information to make our judgments. We're relying on open source information. We're relying on NGO reports. We're relying on feedback on the ground. So there's a whole range . Of
And it's now gone back. into the export control unit. So it hasn't disappeared. The 21 staff are now working back in the export control unit. So there is this. understanding and. misunderstanding that we've stopped doing the work. We haven't. The work continues. We're still doing it. They're just sitting somewhere else in the structure. On the centre for Information Resilience. We still have access to their.
reports and the we. We aren't only. relying on that source of information to make our judgments. We're relying on open source information. We're relying on NGO reports. We're relying on feedback on the ground. So there's a whole range . Of
15:41
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:42
15:42
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
On Israel to affect that change? Yeah. So I think it's quite important. And the Foreign Secretary has done likewise. I think it's very important to put on record the speed and. professionalism with which the Department has responded to what is, by any measure, a very significant shift in policy. And I'm pleased to have you reflect that it's been welcomed so warmly by Parliament. Honestly, it is a it is a really.
significant change in policy in terms of how we talk about the. settlements and the legality of the occupation. What remains. unchanged is our humanitarian commitment to the. Palestinian people. What I hope we've done is effect a policy change. That means that that sort of enduring commitment and as you know, during the cuts, are aid for the Palestinian people is one of the things that was.
significant change in policy in terms of how we talk about the. settlements and the legality of the occupation. What remains. unchanged is our humanitarian commitment to the. Palestinian people. What I hope we've done is effect a policy change. That means that that sort of enduring commitment and as you know, during the cuts, are aid for the Palestinian people is one of the things that was.
15:43
15:43
15:43
15:43
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Aid is trying to deal with a problem that has a. political cause and a political source, and it's trying to. mitigate risks, the origin of which lie elsewhere. And so this change that we have. affected is to try and keep the prospects of a two state solution alive, which is really the only the only way we get to a. situation where the duty bearer to the Palestinian people is a Palestinian government, and they are not reliant on.
humanitarian funding and support in the way that they have been for so very long. Just on a on a personal note, I went to Gaza before the more recent war, and conditions were completely. intolerable then, and I met with Gazan children who. It was sort of. mortifying to have them say, we're so pleased you've come because we thought the world had forgotten us. It was, I mean, horrifying, the conditions that children were enduring.
And so I think this this policy change is, is an attempt to keep the.
humanitarian funding and support in the way that they have been for so very long. Just on a on a personal note, I went to Gaza before the more recent war, and conditions were completely. intolerable then, and I met with Gazan children who. It was sort of. mortifying to have them say, we're so pleased you've come because we thought the world had forgotten us. It was, I mean, horrifying, the conditions that children were enduring.
And so I think this this policy change is, is an attempt to keep the.
15:44
15:44
15:44
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
borne by a. functioning state minister. Can I can I just say. personally how. disappointing it is to hear it referred to as a policy change? Because the. Icj's advisory ruling two years ago was very clear that Israel was occupying Palestine. And therefore, as a country, we had duties that were signed up to that. And you rightly talk about the.
horrendous humanitarian situation that was in Gaza years ago. We've known about this for a long time, so it surprises me that it's a surprise to the department that they need to now change, to . Scale up
horrendous humanitarian situation that was in Gaza years ago. We've known about this for a long time, so it surprises me that it's a surprise to the department that they need to now change, to . Scale up
15:45
15:45
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
is a really significant shift in in UK policy. That pains me, Minister, because I think our international. credibility has been. dented because we didn't follow the very clear rules of law, particularly when it comes to protecting humanitarians. And I hope that this change. One of the big shifts we will get is . Being a
15:46
15:46
15:46
15:46
15:46
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Explain more about why that makes sense in a circle? So I'd say I think I think it's important to restate that our humanitarian commitment to the Palestinian people is ongoing. I met with the interim executive director of the World Food. Programme about our support to World Food Programme more generally. The thing that he impressed upon me that I have been really wrestling with since the. conversation is we we have a series of choices that are the stuff of.
15:47
15:47
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Which is. There are so many acute. emergencies right now where lives are at stake right now, and there is a need to invest in ongoing. resilience so that there are fewer such. instances in the future. And now that we are past peak aid, these are the nightmare choices that are in front of every world food programme donor is does does our money do more good? Does it is it more successful in building the world? We want to see if we're investing in those long term resilience or we are constantly responding to emergencies.
And, you know, I'd, I'd welcome reflections and challenge from the committee about whether we're getting the balance between those two things. Right?
And, you know, I'd, I'd welcome reflections and challenge from the committee about whether we're getting the balance between those two things. Right?
15:47
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Because that is that is the stuff of nightmares. Can I just add one thing to that? I mean, the issue is not money in Gaza. It's access. And the I mean, averting famine cannot be a measure of success. And we know exactly why there isn't the access. And we know exactly why the dual use goods are not being allowed into Gaza. And that's purely because of the actions of the Israeli government.
And we need more of the crossing point to be opened. We need more flexibility in terms of what comes in, and we need Israel to live up to the commitments made in the . 20 point
And we need more of the crossing point to be opened. We need more flexibility in terms of what comes in, and we need Israel to live up to the commitments made in the . 20 point
15:48
15:48
15:48
15:48
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
spent. elsewhere because we don't have that access. Well, money can be spent. I mean, the needs are enormous inside Gaza. I mean, we we are still funding Unwra. And despite what the Israeli government is trying to do in terms of shutting down Unwra because we think they are incredibly important for the services of the Palestinian people, we are going to and are supporting the. Palestinian Authority itself.
So there are ways that you can provide and spend the money well, but.
So there are ways that you can provide and spend the money well, but.
15:49
15:49
15:49
15:49
15:49
Monica Harding
-
-
Monica Harding
into quickfire questions. Would be very grateful for quickfire answers. I'll do my best. I just need to pick up on that point. The World Food Programme are very specific that this is about need. It's not about access. So dual use 100% agree with you. But we are the ninth largest donor to World Food Programme, and we have cut it by 78%. And this is with respect. You can see the frustration when we say there is a there should be a pathway to 0.7%.
So this isn't the stuff of nightmares anymore. But we're not hearing from the government that pathway to 0.7%. I'll move on to Sudan. Thank you. Talking about countries that think that we may have forgotten them, and also the very welcome shift of the. government to the adherence to international law and international. humanitarian law, and calling out our friends as well as our foes. Will there be a shift .
in over Sudan by the government,
So this isn't the stuff of nightmares anymore. But we're not hearing from the government that pathway to 0.7%. I'll move on to Sudan. Thank you. Talking about countries that think that we may have forgotten them, and also the very welcome shift of the. government to the adherence to international law and international. humanitarian law, and calling out our friends as well as our foes. Will there be a shift .
in over Sudan by the government,
15:50
15:50
15:50
15:50
15:50
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
there has also been the track around the conflict more widely and making sure that we are. straining absolutely every. diplomatic sinew, and both myself and the Foreign Secretary have sought and received briefings from day one on Sudan, and I think we are going to be speaking in coming weeks and months to satisfy ourselves that we have strained absolutely every sinew to get an. enduring settlement in Sudan. That . Means that the
15:50
15:50
15:50
15:51
15:51
15:51
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
spoke to Africa , CDC and the African Union when I was in Ethiopia. And the thing that they both said is British money is fast and wise. So we are spending it on the right things and we're dispersing fast. As you know, there have been other donors that have made commitments but haven't moved as fast to dispersal. And it's also been a feature of I noted earlier, I'm having a number of bilateral conversations with African ministers, of which this is very much a feature.
But yes, I am. I am confident that we've stepped up to the to the plate in all of our. conversations for the . Africa
But yes, I am. I am confident that we've stepped up to the to the plate in all of our. conversations for the . Africa
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
15:52
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
includes Oxford, has started on the vaccine for this. particular Ebola strain, so we'll have to wait and see how that progresses. But the bottom line here, this is the the second largest Ebola outbreak ever. Now, we've been playing catch up right from the beginning. I mean, our support has been terrific and well targeted. But this is
15:52
15:52
15:52
Brian Mathew
-
-
Brian Mathew
that it's a loan rather than a grant. Brian. Okay, quickly , and I'll put my own hat on it. In the next 12 months. A food supply systems are likely to come under considerable stress through war and climate events. My own hat . Being an agricultural engineer, I'll talk about the importance of soil and compost in improving moisture holding.
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
15:53
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
moment, food and the food system sits in our corporate mind in humanitarian. And I actually think it needs to sit. alongside climate and health and economic security and human security. Actually, it's so cross-cutting. And honestly, of the five. security's food security and the pressure on the international food system is the thing that keeps me awake most at night. So I'll be very keen to . Continue
15:54
Tracy Gilbert
-
-
Tracy Gilbert
both expressing a similar level of alarm. Lovely. Thank you. Women, peace and security. Sorry. It's going to be quite based on a very large topic. We were told. previously by the minister that they would be reviewing the current commitments in relation to conflict prevention and. resolution as part of the NAP plan. Could you tell us when that's going to be published and when will the .
Planning.
Planning.
15:54
15:54
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Evaluation and learning framework also be published? I can't give you a date of when it will be published, but to reassure, I think there was some disquiet about whether a refresh was quite adequate and whether there needed to be a completely new plan and strategy, and having spoken to the colleagues working on it, I think they would want me to signal and telegraph that actually, the fact that it's a refresh is a sign of how highly we prize it, that we don't want the work to be slowed down by doing a whole we want to crack on with the work and and scale it rather than restart .
It from
It from
15:55
Tracy Gilbert
-
-
Tracy Gilbert
first principles. So I can't give you a date of publication, but I'll get back to you. Thank you. And just a brief follow up in terms, we heard a lot about. mainstreaming and women and girls , and through specific. programmes and commitments towards their inclusion. Can you tell us if that is still the sort of direction of travel? And also, will the Fcdo collate the data on how these.
15:55
15:55
15:55
15:55
15:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yes, will be an ongoing feature. And Minister Elmore, as you know, is kind of leading on all those, and I'll be working with him very closely on that . On the. wider mainstreaming, I think lots of feminists have a legitimate anxiety that mainstreaming is called for. It will be everywhere, but potentially nowhere to to give a very public undertaking. Women and girls is absolutely central to everything that I want to achieve. I want held to account on it, and I want held to account for the agenda beyond vogue, as I have said repeatedly in public.
So I need you to hold me to it. Next week at Unga, I'll be doing some interventions on Srhr and a wider sort of rights framework. And as I say, we we.
So I need you to hold me to it. Next week at Unga, I'll be doing some interventions on Srhr and a wider sort of rights framework. And as I say, we we.
15:56
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
Absolutely Vogue is foundational, but it has to be the floor, not the ceiling. Minister, could I reiterate the point that Tracy made if if we could or you could ask for a commitment to data. collection that seems to be the best way to hold people to account, because we're talking about structural inequality here, not access to resources. And . That seems to
15:56
15:56
15:56
15:56
Sam Rushworth
-
-
Sam Rushworth
Today. Unicef found that bilateral aid was cut for child focused programmes, was cut. 57% from 2019 to 2023. It's obviously been cut even more deeply since then, and we have heard evidence as well that when the previous Home Secretary made women and girls a priority, that that had a material difference in the way that NGOs were writing their programmes and applications. So will you consider making. children explicit priority of . Government so that
15:57
15:57
15:57
15:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
And I don't want to pre-empt where we are going to land, but I do want to underscore in public my level of ambition around this. I'm not yet completely set on what the right. mechanism is, but to reassure, I'm taking advice from officials about that, about how we do the organisational design piece right, to put children and young people at the heart. So I can very happily reiterate my level of ambition. But I don't want to give you a .
Commitment to the
Commitment to the
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:58
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
15:59
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Commitments effectively in an. increasingly climate affected world? So it will be as a huge feature of everything that we do in the upcoming multilateral settings that we do. Actually, the Foreign Secretary and I have a. discussion tabled on financing tomorrow to address this and other questions, and I'll be delighted to come back to you after that. But I just I think the Foreign Secretary would want me to. underscore just how committed he is to this and how happy he is to .
16:00
16:00
16:00
16:00
16:00
16:00
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
16:01
16:01
Sarah Champion
-
-
Sarah Champion
We need more data on on what works and where you've spent. But the. principles we absolutely stand behind. So yeah, we look forward to you hopefully being able to use that. Minister. Nick, it's been a real pleasure. It's been fascinating to learn your approach. Thank you for being so generous with your time and sharing your thoughts on all of this. We hope this is a regular.
16:01
16:01