UK slashes aid to poorest nations in ‘moral catastrophe’ of 40% savings – and fails to fully protect HIV funding
The UK government will cut aid spending to some of the world’s poorest countries as part of a drive to cut spending by 40 per cent.
The plans, set out by Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, will see bilateral support for African countries fall from £1.3bn to £677m a year (a 56 per cent drop) over the next three years; Countries such as Afghanistan, Yemen and Myanmar will also face severe disruptions.
The government has also failed to fully protect funding for HIV, despite calls from the United States. Independentas well as MPs and charities Maintain funding for HIV treatment until 2030Amid concerns that progress is being made in the fight against the disease reversible As a result of aid cuts first announced last year.
While funding for certain key areas, including Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan, has been “protected” or kept the same, funding for HIV has not been classified as such. Going forward, UK aid spending on HIV will be largely channeled through funding to the Global Fund. The United Kingdom also confirmed this last December. will cut funding by £150 million – and bilateral aid programs to developing countries in Africa and beyond, which are set to be significantly cut.
Ms Cooper said she now plans to prioritize financing from multilateral institutions such as the UN and the World Bank, as well as countries classified as “fragile and conflict-affected” such as Sudan, Ukraine, Palestine and now Lebanon, with aid sent to these countries increasing from 57 per cent to 71 per cent. But even this represents an overall disruption compared to the last few years.
This also means that funding for low-income countries that are not classified as “fragile and conflict-affected” is likely to be lost, with aid cuts of up to 60 percent, even as many of these countries continue to struggle to attract foreign capital beyond aid.
Ms Cooper also said the government had “fully protected central program spending on violence against women and girls, women’s peace and security and the prevention of sexual violence in conflict”. However, education programs are likely to be cut.
a 56 percent decrease between 2026/27 and 2028/29; The cuts are likely to affect bilateral aid to Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Mauritius, Senegal and Sierra Leone. The amount of money the UK spends on aiding humanitarian crises such as natural disasters will also be cut by 15 per cent, falling to just under £300 million a year.
Ian Mitchell, senior fellow at the Center for Global Development think tank, agrees that the impacts on Africa will be severe: “It is difficult to justify reducing the share of aid going to Africa, where fragility, poverty and future opportunity are concentrated, and talk of ‘global partnerships’ risks ringing hollow,” he said.
“There is strong public support to help those who need it most, and for a government serious about tackling extreme poverty, this means a clear focus on Africa.”
Meanwhile, climate finance will fall from £11.6bn over the five years to 2026 to £6bn over the next three years, a drop of almost 15 per cent. Funding for key multilateral funds supporting global health, including the Pandemic Fund and the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, will also be cut.
Despite reports that HIV funding will not be protected, Development Minister Jenny Chapman said it remained a government priority. Independent He said the government “remains as committed to this agenda as ever.”
“We’re really concerned about what’s going on with HIV at the moment and we think the risk may be starting to increase, particularly in young girls,” Baroness Chapman told members of the media in a briefing, adding that the UK would provide £4 million in funding to UNAIDs. before the agency was closed its services are absorbed by other institutions.
Thursday’s aid announcements come a year after Sir Keir Starmer announced aid spending would be cut from 0.5 per cent to 0.3 per cent of gross national income (GNI), a move ministers said would help fund higher defense spending in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
In response to Ms Cooper’s statement, Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Select Committee, warned that the UK’s strategy of cutting the aid budget to protect military spending was a false dichotomy.
“Development spending keeps people fed, safe and prosperous,” he told MPs. “We will see the consequences of Britain stepping away from the global stage and towards our reputation, our influence, and also people will come to our shores for refuge.
“These cuts don’t help our defense; they make the whole world more vulnerable.”
“It is encouraging to focus on women and girls, who are often the most vulnerable of the global poor,” Ms. Champion said. “I particularly welcome the Department’s target that at least 90 per cent of aid programs include gender equality by 2030. The capacity to enable this and measure success will need to be maintained, and my Committee will examine this pledge closely.
Monica Harding, the Liberal Democrats’ International Development spokesperson, said the cuts were a “moral disaster” and underlined that the cuts were likely to continue. More severe than Donald Trump’s cuts in the USAalongside cuts made by the previous Conservative Government.
Green Party’s foreign affairs spokesman Dr. Ellie Chowns said: “Cutting international aid is false economics and puts Britain’s security at greater risk.
“The UK’s defense cannot exist separately from global security. You cannot make Britain more secure by making the rest of the world more unstable.”
Catherine Pettengell, chief executive of Climate Action Network UK, said: Independent The cuts are thought to be “really bad” given that UK climate finance has previously doubled every five years, with the next package set to result in £23.2bn over five years.
Responding to the cuts announced on Thursday, ONE Campaign’s UK Executive Director, Adrian Lovett, said: “Today’s figures reveal the true scale of these cuts and the damage they will cause. Cutting bilateral aid to Africa, where the need is greatest, will have a devastating impact.”
“These elections will leave millions of people without access to essential health care, education and emergency humanitarian support, and risk a resurgence of the deadly diseases we have tried to combat for decades.
“Although FCDO officials have clearly worked to preserve some priorities, they have been given an impossible task: You cannot cut 40 percent from the aid budget without devastating consequences, and this will now also apply to the world’s poorest countries.”
This article was produced as part of The Independent. Rethinking Global Aid project
