Labour MPs warn aid budget cuts could allow greater role for Russia and China
Labour MPs have warned aid budget cuts could result in Britain's departure from the world stage, with Russia and China filling the void.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer was also accused of 'taking the axe' to Britain's 'most effective tool for reducing global conflicts' by Labour's Sarah Champion, who chairs the International Development Committee.
While several MPs welcomed the Government's decision to increase defence spending to 2.5% of the size of the economy from April 2027, ministers faced calls to reconsider the plan to achieve this by slashing development assistance aid from its current level of 0.5% of gross national income (GNI) to 0.3% in 2027.
Speaking during an estimates day debate, Ms Champion told the Commons: 'I urge the Prime Minister to recognise that if we abandon our commitments to the world in this way, we will see greater numbers of people displaced from their own homes as a result of climate disasters, poverty and war.
'More people will lose hope and instead look to extreme ideologies for the answer, and civil societies will no longer have the skills to hold rogue governments to account.
'It concerns me greatly, as it should the whole House, that the Government has yet to carry out an assessment of the impact of their decisions, which is being rushed through without proper scrutiny.'
Ms Champion also said a 'scandalously large amount' of official development assistance (ODA) has been diverted to the Home Office and there should be a cap on how much ODA can be spent supporting asylum seekers and refugees in the UK.
Labour's Dame Emily Thornberry, who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, said: 'Under this Government we are taking a lead again, so the question is, are we going to step up to this challenge? Which we're more than capable of doing, but we can't just do it on two Chewits, a button and a postage stamp.'
She added: 'I am concerned these ODA cuts won't be the last of these challenges, there are also rumours that the Foreign Office will, on top of that, be expecting cuts of between 2 and 11%. In that scenario, it would be selling its businesses, its buildings, will the embassies shrink?'
Dame Emily said she hopes there will be an 'enormous amount of work' being done into the details of the cuts, adding: 'I fear we may be looking back at this time and we may say to ourselves, this is when Britain left the world and yet it really should be the time when we're able to say Britain is back, and we're back as a force for good.'
Conservative former international development secretary Andrew Mitchell said: 'Who is it who will fill the gap in all of this? It will be China and Russia. And of course it will be music to the ears of the many terrorist organisations which exist across Sub-Saharan Africa.'
Labour MP Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) said UK aid 'makes the world safer and it saves lives', noting: 'Cutting the aid budget will undercut our ability to build global partnerships and alliances.
'When the UK helps countries to adjust to climate change, to grow and to prosper, we build our relationships and our influence. When countries like ours withdraw, China and Russia stand ready to step in.'
Labour MP Blair McDougall (East Renfrewshire), who worked in the aid sector for 10 years, questioned what the UK's 'offer to the global south' is now if it is no longer a 'development superpower'.
He said: 'We know what Russia's offer is, it's blood for gold, they will come and kill your enemies with mercenaries for you and take precious minerals out of your country. We know what it is for China, it's infrastructure in return for debt that keeps you in their power.
'We can't offer violence, we can't demand subservience, it seems to me for us it's values but values need vehicles to be projected.'
Foreign Office minister Stephen Doughty said: 'Our intent is to get back to 0.7% of GNI as soon as the fiscal circumstances allow and the Prime Minister has been very, very clear about that.'
He later added: 'We will continue to play a key role, doing everything we can to move towards rebuilding our capacity and remain committed to working in Sudan, in Ukraine, in Gaza, on tackling climate change, on supporting multinational efforts on global health and challenges like vaccination, of course our commitments to the Overseas Territories, too.
'And I have to really level with the House, and I hope people can see and feel this, but in this dangerous new era, the defence and national security of this country must come first.
'This is not the 1990s. This is not even 2005.
'And I cannot look at what I do every day or indeed other ministers look at every day and not recognise that we have to respond differently to the very, very serious threats facing this country, our continent and the world.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
What are the concessions to the welfare bill - and will MPs back it?
Number 10 has made concessions on its welfare bill after crisis talks with Labour rebels. Sir Keir Starmer will be hoping the changes are enough to avoid a Commons defeat when the measures are put to a vote on Tuesday - but several MPs have said they are still not satisfied. Sky News looks at what was in the deal and whether it will be enough to win over critics. Changes to PIP In a letter to MPs, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall confirmed all existing claimants of the personal independence payment (pip) will be exempt from the cuts to eligibility. It means the new qualifying requirements will be implemented from November 2026 for new claims only. This is a big U-turn as the changes to pip, the main disability benefit in England, had caused the most upset among MPs planning to rebel. Pip is money given to people, including some of whom are in work, who have extra care or mobility needs as a result of a disability. People who claim it are awarded points depending on their ability to do certain activities, such as washing and preparing food, which influences how much they will receive. Currently claimants need to score a minimum of eight points across a range of tasks to qualify for the daily living element (there is a mobility element that is not affected by the plans). Under the new rules people will need to score a minimum of four points in at least one activity to qualify. By limiting the changes to new claimants only, it is estimated 370,000 people who had been due to lose out will now get to keep their benefit. This will come at a cost of £1.5bn by the end of the parliament, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. It is not clear how that will be funded, prompting speculation of tax rises at the autumn budget. Universal Credit The second row back involves planned changes to universal credit (UC) The government had intended to freeze the health top-up at £97 a week during this parliament. However, all current recipients of the health element, as well as any new applicants meeting the "severe conditions criteria", will now have their incomes protected in real terms. The government will still cut the rate to £50 for new claimants from 2026/7, while raising the standard rate of UC for jobseekers. More money for people to find work The health top-up is for people who have a limited ability to work because of a disability or long term sickness, but ministers are concerned about the rising number of claimants and want to incentivise people back into work. Ms Kendall previously said £1bn would be used for targeted support schemes to help people out of inactivity and into jobs. In her letter, she said the government "will front load more of the additional funding generated by these reforms for back to work support for sick and disabled people". 0:43 Will MPs back the changes? Care minister Stephen Kinnock told Sky News on Friday morning the changes are a "really big step in the right direction". The purpose of the bill was to shave £5bn off the welfare budget by 2030 and tackle the rising numbers of people who are economically inactive. Lots of MPs said they agreed with the principle of reform but were concerned with the impact on disabled people. Initially, over 120 Labour MPs had signed a "reasoned amendment" calling for the changes to be delayed while disabled people were consulted on. Dame Meg Hillier, the influential chair of the Treasury select committee who had tabled the amendment, said last night that the government had offered a "good deal". However, it is ultimately up to individual MPs to decide if they want to support it. Several MPs on the left of the party have come forward to say they won't. This includes the likes of Richard Burgon, Ian Byrne and Nadia Whittome, who have expressed concerns about a two-tier system. Sky News has spoken to other MPs who privately say they won't back the bill. One rebel said a WhatsApp group has been set up to announce their intentions and he believes 50 have already stated their intention to vote against the bill. Others have told Sky News they are undecided. One rebel said she has "no idea" how she'll vote and is "waiting to see the finer details and how things pan out on Monday". Another said he expects he will no longer vote against but will make his mind up firmly when he has seen the full details.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
DWP Universal Credit and PIP cuts U-turn by Government
The announcement comes after crisis talks with backbenchers, with some 126 MPs within the party signing an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks. Sir Keir Starmer's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill has its second reading on Tuesday, the first opportunity for MPs to support or reject it. A spokesperson for Number 10 said: 'We have listened to MPs who support the principle of reform but are worried about the pace of change for those already supported by the system. I've made it clear: I won't vote for any cuts to PIP. We should be building a system that lifts people up — not taking vital support away from those who need it most. — Imran Hussain MP (@Imran_HussainMP) June 26, 2025 'This package will preserve the social security system for those who need it by putting it on a sustainable footing, provide dignity for those unable to work, supports those who can and reduce anxiety for those currently in the system. 'Our reforms are underpinned by Labour values and our determination to deliver the change the country voted for last year.' The Government's original package restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limited the sickness-related element of universal credit. The PIP Cuts DWP Welfare Bill must be pulled. I've signed an amendment to the Bill alongside 100+ calling for a pause and rethink. The Government must #PullTheBill and #StopTheCuts to #PIP#York — 💙Rachael Maskell MP (@RachaelMaskell) June 25, 2025 What's changed? Existing claimants were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. In her letter, the Work and Pensions Secretary said: 'We recognise the proposed changes have been a source of uncertainty and anxiety. 'We will ensure that all of those currently receiving PIP will stay within the current system. The new eligibility requirements will be implemented from November 2026 for new claims only. 'Secondly, we will adjust the pathway of Universal Credit payment rates to make sure all existing recipients of the UC health element – and any new claimant meeting the severe conditions criteria – have their incomes fully protected in real terms.' She said a ministerial review would ensure the benefit is 'fair and fit for the future' and will be a 'coproduction' with disabled people, organisations which represent them and MPs. 'These important reforms are rooted in Labour values, and we want to get them right,' she said. This U-turn could protect 370,000 existing claimants The change in Pip payments would protect some 370,000 existing claimants who were expected to lose out following reassessment. If the legislation clears its first hurdle on Tuesday, it will then face a few hours' examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee tasked with looking at the Bill. The so-called 'reasoned amendment' tabled by Treasury select committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier had argued that disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. She said: 'This is a good deal. It is massive changes to ensure the most vulnerable people are protected… and, crucially, involving disabled people themselves in the design of future benefit changes.' While the concessions look set to reassure some of those who had been leading the rebellion, other MPs remained opposed before the announcement. The Disability Benefit Cuts Bill has been published. On average PIP recipients will lose £4,500 a year. These are the deepest cuts to disability benefits since George Osborne - impacting 3 million people. This won't create jobs, it will create poverty. MPs must vote against. — Neil Duncan-Jordan MP (@NeilForPoole) June 18, 2025 Have all the MPs backed this concession? Speaking before the concessions were revealed, Rachel Maskell said: 'As the Government is seeking to reform the system, they should protect all disabled people until they have completed their co-produced consultation and co-produced implementation. 'I cannot vote for something that will have such a significant impact … as disabled people are not involved, it is just a backroom deal.' One MP said that ministers would need to 'go back to the drawing board' to make the Bill acceptable. Another said they expected the legislation would get through second reading if the Government conceded the key sticking points relating to existing Pip claimants, the health element of universal credit and a policy consultation. 'It would need to be in the Bill, not just a commitment,' they said. Speaking in the Commons on Wednesday, Sir Keir told MPs he wanted the reforms to reflect 'Labour values of fairness' and that discussions about the changes would continue over the coming days. He insisted there was 'consensus across the House on the urgent need for reform' of the 'broken' welfare system. 'I know colleagues across the House are eager to start fixing that, and so am I, and that all colleagues want to get this right, and so do I,' he said. 'We want to see reform implemented with Labour values of fairness. 'That conversation will continue in the coming days, so we can begin making change together on Tuesday.' What have campaigners said about the concessions? There was a mixed reaction among charities to the prospect of concessions. Learning disability charity Mencap said the news would be a 'huge relief to thousands of people living in fear of what the future holds'. 'It is the right thing to do and sends a clear message – cutting disability benefits is not a fair way to mend the black hole in the public purse,' director of strategy Jackie O'Sullivan said. But the MS Society urged rebels to hold firm and block the Bill, insisting any Government offer to water down the reforms would amount to 'kicking the can down the road and delaying an inevitable disaster'. Head of campaigns at the charity, Charlotte Gill, said: 'We urge MPs not to be swayed by these last-ditch attempts to force through a harmful Bill with supposed concessions. 'The only way to avoid a catastrophe today and in the future is to stop the cuts altogether by halting the Bill in its tracks.' Recommended reading: What about opposition MPs? The Tories described concessions as 'the latest in a growing list of screeching U-turns' from the Government. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: 'Under pressure from his own MPs, Starmer has made another completely unfunded spending commitment. 'Labour's welfare chaos will cost hardworking taxpayers. 'We can't afford Labour.'
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
John Swinney in funding threat to councils over flagship education policy
EXCLUSIVE: An exasperated First Minister has written to COSLA and accused councils of stalling on a deal to cut class contact time for teachers. An angry John Swinney has threatened to withhold funding from councils unless they fulfill a promise to free up time for teachers. In a letter obtained by the Record, the First Minister has accused town hall chiefs of stalling on a deal to cut class contact time for teachers. He said he could 'withhold or recover relevant monies' if councils backslide on the agreement. A senior council source hit back by saying the policy is 'simply unaffordable and potentially undeliverable'. The row stems from a £186.5m Budget deal on restoring teacher numbers to 2023 levels and making meaningful progress on reducing class contact time for teachers. Ministers want class contact time reduced by an hour and a half a week to help teachers prepare for lessons, raise standards and undertake professional development. In his letter to council umbrella group, Swinney accused councils of not coming good on the deal: 'I am concerned about the lack of progress on delivery of the commitment to make meaningful progress on reducing class contact time. 'We simply cannot afford to stall on this any longer, particularly when we are facing a dispute and ballot on industrial action from the teacher unions on this issue, as part of their concerns over workload.' He added: 'The agreement to provide increased funding of £186.5 million was made in good faith by the Scottish Government. It is essential that meaningful progress on reducing class contact time is now made, with a credible proposal to the unions ready for August, in order to fulfil the requirements of our agreement.. 'Ultimately, where we do not consider that satisfactory progress is being made on delivery of the agreement, the Scottish Government reserves the right to adjust, withhold or recover relevant monies allocated to individual councils for these purposes.' His threat came ahead of a meeting of COSLA today where the class contact time commitment will be discussed. A COSLA paper makes clear council chiefs do not believe they have enough money to deliver the policy: 'There is a strong consensus that councils would not be able to deliver the policy from the existing funding envelope available to Local Government.' COSLA also claimed a phased reduction of class contact time cannot be achieved if councils revert to 2023 levels of teachers. They also cited modelling which suggested over 3800 additional teachers would be required for a reduction in class contact time by 1.5 hours. COSLA's proposed position is to seek extra funding for reducing class contact time if the Government confirms it as a priority. A council insider said: "A 1.5 hour reduction in class contact time for teachers is simply unaffordable and potentially undeliverable in many areas due to a shortage of teachers, even if the Scottish Government came up with extra funding, which they say they don't have. 'If the Scottish Government tries to force this policy through it will require cuts to other aspects of education, which would impact detrimentally on children and young people. This policy has not been fully thought through by Ministers. They are desperate to appease the teaching unions and avoid industrial action."
