ONE Statement on Government Response to IDC inquiry on aid definition
Today the Government has issued its response to the International Development Committee’s inquiry into the Definition and Administration of Official Development Assistance (ODA). While the Government welcomed the report in general, some of the committee’s recommendations* were not accepted.
Speaking on the Government’s response, Romilly Greenhill, UK Director of The ONE Campaign, said: “Like going to a doctor but not taking their health advice, it’s unwise of the Government to not take the IDC’s recommendations fully on board. The Committee’s proposals would have improved aid spending by all parts of Government. While most UK aid is ‘real’ aid, making a real change for the world’s poorest people, some aid falls short of these high standards, as the Committee rightly notes.
“For aid to be the real-deal, it must be poverty focused, effective and transparent. When UK aid meets these criteria it makes a huge difference to the lives of millions, and enables us to remain a global leader in the fight against poverty.
Notes to editors
*The Government rejected or partially rejected some of the IDC’s recommendations on:
- Avoiding blurring the lines around counting humanitarian assistance as aid, regardless of how rich a country is.
- Avoiding increasing the amount of peacekeeping and security costs that should be counted as aid.
- Using an international system which decides which countries should be allowed to receive aid, and that rich countries should remain ineligible.
- Sticking to the internationally agreed rules-based-system on what counts as aid
- The International Development Minister should have final sign off on all the UK’s aid
- Reviewing the continuation of the cross-government Conflict, Security and Stability Fund in its current form, in light of concerns about how effectively the money is spent.
- Reviewing existing programmes in the cross-government Prosperity Fund, in light of concerns about its poverty focus.
- Making improvements to the poverty and transparency of cross-government funds, including the Prosperity Fund and CSSR, before increasing their share of ODA any further.