UK: Cuts to International Aid Increases the Suffering of Millions
In late 2020, the United Kingdom government announced they were going to temporarily cut the amount of money they spend on aid. As of November 2020, it stood at 0.7 percent of gross national income, and after the announcement, the proposal was to drop it to 0.5 percent. Although government ministers have announced this as a temporary measure to combat the financial losses of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is one area of the budget that should have been left untouched.
What is foreign aid used for?
In 1970, as part of an agreement with the United Nations, the United Kingdom pledged to spend 0.7 percent of its income on assistance and aid. In 2015, it became law during the Tory-Lib Dem coalition government. Pakistan, Yemen, Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Nigeria are the countries currently receiving the most U.K. assistance. Yemen, — currently facing the world’s worst humanitarian crisis with around 80 percent of the country needing some sort of aid – will witness the closure of dozens of health facilities.
The aid includes money as well as medical equipment and resources, providing education and food.
By cutting the budget by £4 billion, and no target date as of when the 0.7 percent will come back into play, those developing nations already reeling from the pandemic, are going to face potentially fatal effects. The consequences of the budget being slashed have the opportunity to be catastrophic for nations relying on aid.
One section of the government's website from 2015, boasts about how the United Kingdom was the “only G7 country to have met the UN’s target to spend 0.7 percent of gross national income on overseas aid. This is not just the right thing to do, but firmly in our own national interest as well.” It’s difficult to understand why the government has chosen to do something they once deemed as wrong. Professor Guy Howard from the University of Bristol, said: “The impact will be profound and very damaging, particularly for poor people.”
International water and sanitation project funding has also been cut. Repealing this assistance in the middle of a pandemic is cruel when cleanliness is of the utmost importance. In the United Kingdom, one slogan against fighting COVID-19 was “Hands, Face, Space.” If the government understands how important hygiene is in fighting the disease, what grounds do they have to take away vital sanitation from millions overseas?
Reaction to the Funding Cuts
Former secretary at the Department for International Development, Mark Lowcock, said decisions such as substantially cutting overseas aid is “raising questions about Britain’s role in the world. Britain’s reputation. I think it’s tarnishing and diminishing the U.K. in the wider world and a country’s reputation does matter.”
Whilst the majority of the world has witnessed their economies decline, the United Kingdom is the only nation within the G7 to respond in this way. As the U.K. prepares to host the G7 summit in the coming weeks, over thirty Conservative MP’s, including former prime minister Theresa May, rebelled against the proposed aid cut.
Prime Minister Boris Johson defends his actions based on the cuts being a “temporary measure”, for the countries most in need, lives are being risked. The United Kingdom is the second-largest donor in South Sudan, one of the most impoverished nations on earth. Without vital funding and resources, people will die. Many have suffered through the worst of the pandemic, only to be subject to more inhumane suffering at the hands of the British government.
