The UK has announced a significant reduction in its bilateral aid to some of the world’s poorest countries, with a 56% cut in funding set to take effect by 2028-29. This reduction amounts to nearly £900 million and is part of over £6 billion in cuts aimed at increasing defense spending. The decision has sparked criticism from aid agencies, who warn that it will leave the UK’s reputation in tatters and contribute to a more unequal and unstable world.

Impact on Development Aid

The cuts will affect aid to African countries, with the UK reducing its bilateral aid to these nations by almost £900 million. This reduction is part of a broader £6 billion cut to the development budget, which includes a 40% reduction in UK aid spending. The cuts will mean that all aid spending will be cut to all G20 countries except Turkey, with the majority of funding now focused on conflict zones such as Palestine, Sudan, and Ukraine.

Spending will be protected this year for Lebanon, a decision signed off by officials on Wednesday night, due to the intensity of the current offensive from Israel. The overhaul means that 70% of all support will be allocated to the most fragile and conflict-affected states by 2029. Countries such as Afghanistan, Somalia, and Yemen will be among those facing cuts, although they will still receive funding from multinational aid agencies.

Countries such as Mozambique and Pakistan will have almost all their development aid cut, replaced by partnerships for investment. The crisis reserve for humanitarian emergencies has also been cut, though by less than expected, from £85 million to £75 million. “This for us is not an ideological step – it is a difficult choice in the face of international threats,” said Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary.

Consequences for the World’s Poorest Countries

Romilly Greenhill, CEO of Bond, the UK network for NGOs, said that Africa and the Middle East, home to some of the world’s least-developed countries, will be forced to pay the highest price because of the reduced budget. In its analysis of the impact assessment, Bond said that the government’s own data showed that the cuts would leave children, people with disabilities, and older people more vulnerable across several countries, including Ethiopia, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zambia.

Additionally, fewer girls and children with disabilities will be able to go to school in South Sudan. Cuts to programmes in Somalia, one of the world’s most unstable countries, are likely to heavily affect the access to health services for women and children. The most significant impact will be felt across Africa, with bilateral overseas development aid expected to fall from £818 million in 2026 to £677 million by 2029.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) said that the cuts are part of a pivot to multilateral contributions through the World Bank and African Development Bank. The FCDO will also phase out all funding for bilateral programmes in G20 countries, apart from a small allocation to refugee-hosting in Turkey. No direct aid will go to countries such as Brazil, India, Indonesia, and South Africa.

Government’s Rationale and Criticisms

The development minister, Jenny Chapman, said that some of the poorest African nations that would feel the brunt of the cuts, such as Malawi, Mozambique, and Sierra Leone, had expressed a preference for expertise partnerships with the UK, building stable financial systems and clean energy, rather than traditional aid programmes. “I think the concern that happened a year ago around the cuts was that people thought we were doing this because we lost faith in the agenda, we were turning our backs on the world,” she said. “It’s absolutely not.”

Chapman said that the government has undertaken the task in a very collaborative way with its global south partners. “We’ve been very open about it. We’ve listened hard to what people have told us. We’ve been present. We’ve shown up just about everywhere we can, to have these conversations internationally.”

However, some Labour MPs were critical. Fleur Anderson, the MP for Putney, said: “The government has on one hand increased defense spending in response to a more dangerous world, but on the other cut the investment that helps build stability before crises emerge. A serious approach must place development spending at the heart of global resilience and security. Without this, we are not preventing crises; we are simply waiting for them.”

Admitting she was having to make hard choices on aid, Cooper said the UK still expected to be the fifth-biggest funder in the world, but in her statement, she avoided spelling out the precise level of cuts, detail revealed only in the equality impact assessments. The FCDO has said the changes will prioritize geopolitical security and conflict, as well as funding the bigger multinational agencies, such as the vaccine programme Gavi.

The UK has ringfenced £240 million a year until 2029, alongside billions in loan guarantees for Ukraine, as well as protecting allocations for Palestine and Lebanon at current levels, with the latter explicitly funded to “reduce the drivers of irregular migration.” The cuts will also end aid to some major funders, including polio eradication and the Pandemic Fund.

The cost of housing asylum seekers in UK hotels – running at roughly £2 billion a year – is taken from the aid budget. It means that by 2027-28, aid spending on overseas programmes is expected to reach its lowest since records began in 1970, at just 0.24% of gross national income. Chapman said it was a wholesale overhaul of the way aid spending would now operate, after the decision to cut the aid budget despite a 0.7% target being legally enshrined.

Cooper said it was the government’s intention to gradually return to the target when possible. Adrian Lovett, UK executive director of the ONE Campaign, said: “Today’s figures lay bare the true scale of these cuts and the damage they will do. Slashing bilateral aid to Africa, where need is greatest, will have a devastating impact. These choices will leave millions without access to basic healthcare, education, and urgent humanitarian support, and risk a resurgence of deadly diseases we’ve spent decades trying to fight.”