Aid groups slam minister after claims UK is ‘global charity’
13 May 2025, 21:01
Aid groups have hit out at the international development minister for stating the days of the UK Government acting as a “global charity” were over.
Listen to this article
Loading audio...
Aid groups, including Plan International UK and Bond, said they rejected Baroness Jenny Chapman’s description of aid during her appearance in front of the Commons International Development Committee on Tuesday.
Baroness Chapman, who took over as development minister in February after Anneliese Dodds resigned over cuts to the aid budget, told MPs: “The world has changed, and with it so must our approach.
“The days of viewing the UK Government as a global charity are over.”
Faced with backlash, Baroness Chapman has defended her remarks by saying she had to “speak very bluntly” when communicating with the public.
Following the charity remark, Baroness Chapman added there was an “absolute crisis” in public support for international aid, adding that “many of our partner countries” also wanted to “move on from this model”.
Arguing that the UK needed to focus more on sharing expertise than providing cash, she said: “While our commitment to helping those living through emergencies is unwavering – for countries developing, we need to be an investor and not just a donor.
“It’s about partnership and not paternalism.”
But her remarks drew condemnation from aid organisations, who warned that recent cuts to the aid budget could cost lives in the developing world.
Amelia Whitworth, head of policy at the charity Plan International UK, said: “We entirely reject the notion that international development budgets are about acting as a ‘global charity’.
“This framing is not only wrong, it is dangerous. International development funding is a vital pillar of a government’s foreign policy. It helps build a safer, more stable and more prosperous world for everyone.”
Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy at NGO network Bond, said: “UK aid isn’t about charity, it is about global solidarity and responsibility to our international commitments.”
Challenged over her remarks by committee chairwoman Sarah Champion, Baroness Chapman said: “We are not talking to ourselves and I want the public to know, I want them to have confidence in the money that we are spending so we get their consent to continue with this agenda.”
Baroness Chapman’s appearance at the committee followed the Government’s decision in February to slash the aid budget from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% in order to pay for increased defence spending.
The move prompted Dodds’s resignation from the role and sparked concern that it could cost lives in the developing world, coming soon after US President Donald Trump’s decision to effectively gut the US Agency for International Development.
The UK’s decision effectively cuts the aid budget by 40%, something Baroness Chapman said could not be done “without thinking about what you are doing”.
Earlier in the meeting, Champion also expressed “frustration” that Baroness Chapman’s opening remarks had been widely reported in the media, saying this was “disrespectful to the committee”. Baroness Chapman said she accepted the criticism and would ensure it did not happen again.
She also suggested the aid budget would not be slashed again, saying she had “no reason to think” it would fall below 0.3%, a commitment Champion welcomed but said needed clarity "urgently".
Champion later voiced concerns about a lack of “concrete commitments” on which areas would be saved and said it appeared that education and women and girls are “no longer priorities”.
“I hoped to hear the minister set out a clear vision today for how she would deliver these cuts while maintaining the UK’s existing pledges. I am alarmed that, with the clock ticking, there were no concrete commitments on what will be reduced and what is saved,” she said.
She said the minister had admitted that the Government’s change of direction was a “political choice” but that “choices have consequences”, suggesting the UK’s international standing would be seriously impacted.
