King's College London

The UK’s aid programme risks losing both impact and public trust unless it moves decisively towards locally led, long‑term investment, witnesses told the International Development Committee during a public evidence session at King’s College London.

The International Development Committee - whose role is to examine issues and make recommendations to improve policy - held the live oral evidence session at King's as part of its inquiry on the Future of UK Aid and Development Assistance.

Civil‑society leaders from the Caribbean, southern Africa and Nigeria argued that short funding cycles and externally designed projects undermine sustainability, particularly in contexts facing overlapping crises from climate change, conflict and economic instability.

Sapphire Alexander, founder of the feminist collective Whole Caribbean Feminist, described how small island states are hit simultaneously by gender inequality, crime and climate shocks. She called for flexible, multi‑year funding and participatory grant‑making that allows communities to redirect resources rapidly when disasters strike.

“Communities know best what their priorities are,” she argued, warning that rigid funding conditions leave organisations unable to respond effectively.

In October 2025 the International Development Committee launched its inquiry on the Future of UK aid and international development.

The inquiry examines how the UK can continue to deliver high impact international aid and development assistance in the face of a 40% budget cut as the Government seeks to fund increased defence spending in the name of national security.

From Zimbabwe, social entrepreneur Chido Govera highlighted structural imbalances in donor‑led consortia, where international organisations typically control decision‑making.

She urged the UK to rotate leadership within partnerships, invest in local organisational capacity and treat development as an investment rather than a series of short‑term grants.

The international development budget will be cut from 0.5% of the UK’s Gross National Income – the equivalent total income of people and businesses in the UK – to 0.3% in 2027.

The effect of this is expected to be a £15.4bn budget being reduced to £9.2bn, not all of which will be spent abroad.

Govera pointed to her organisation’s mushroom‑farming model as an example of how skills, nutrition and income can be combined when funding supports innovation and research rather than delivery alone.

Meanwhile, Nigerian nutrition and migration advocate Finian Ali criticised what he described as the “artificial separation” between humanitarian relief and long‑term development.

He warned that food aid unconnected to livelihoods, skills or markets leaves communities dependent and vulnerable once emergency support ends. Ali described youth‑designed apprenticeship schemes lasting several years as more effective than short training programmes imposed from outside.

A second panel examined public attitudes towards aid. Bel Trew, chief international correspondent at The Independent, said a lack of transparency over aid allocations fuels negative coverage and scepticism. She argued that the government should focus on a small number of concrete outcomes it can clearly communicate to the public.

Polling expert Luke Tryl, executive director of More in Common, said public support increases when aid delivers tangible results such as vaccination programmes, but warned that voters remain sceptical unless governments demonstrate value for money and address failures openly.

Jennifer Hudson of UCLA’s Development Engagement Lab added that the public responds more positively to messages about fairness, partnership and locally led capacity‑building than to abstract debates about power or ideology.

Committee members indicated that the evidence would inform an upcoming report on the future direction of UK aid, expected to be published in the coming weeks.

The Committee has already published over 195 pieces of written evidence for the inquiry and heard from experts on the impact of restructuring to the main delivery department (the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office) on its ability to deliver its ODA commitments.

 

You can watch the full session here