The great disappointment: the politics of international development in 2025

As 2025 began the excitement of the general election had subsided, and the real task of governing was well underway for the Labour Party.  

There was a real, palpable sense of optimism. On the very first day back in January, Bond and members hosted a special, packed-out reception welcoming back the MPs, with keynote speeches from the then Development Minister, Anneliese Dodds. In what is usually a quiet day in parliament, over 200 campaigners, activists, and parliamentarians crammed into a small room in parliament to hear about the challenges ahead but also the real, strong actions the government needed to take to tackle the scourge of poverty, conflict, and climate change.   

Of course, Labour had already ruled out returning to spending 0.7% of the country’s gross national income on UK aid, immediately adopting the well-worn lines of the Conservative Party – “only when the fiscal situation allows.” And yes, the party had also ruled out reestablishing an independent department to lead UK aid and development efforts, despite the Prime Minister promising to do so when in opposition.   

Was the situation perfect? Of course not. But despite these remaining challenges, there was hope within the sector that there would be greater support for robust development policy after previous governments had deprioritised it. The only way was up.  

How wrong we were.  

UK aid cuts and polarised political responses 

One cold February morning, the day started as it normally did – checking the news sites, checking emails, preparing for a usual day ahead. ‘Brumm brummm (that’s my phone vibrating on the desk because who has their phone on loud these days?).’ The text message from a well-sourced contact read “Have you heard anything about potential cuts?”.   

‘Brumm brummmm.’ “Aid cuts?”   

The text messages started to roll in one after another. After the third, I made a big pot of coffee as I knew it’d be one of those days.  

Bond and members were shocked that a Labour government cut the UK aid budget from 0.5% to 0.3% of GNI by 2027 to fund an increase in defence spending. We felt both alarmed and let down by a government that promised so much in their own manifesto to support people facing poverty, climate change and conflict around the world.  

We have been clear: these cuts will cost lives, and it’ll be the most marginalised communities that will bear the brunt. And we weren’t the only ones who were disappointed (to put in mildly) by the Prime Ministers actions. The International Development Minister, Anneliese Dodds, resigned, saying the cuts would “remove food and healthcare from desperate people – deeply harming the UK’s reputation”.    

Although there wasn’t an outright public rebellion, a lot of Labour MPs were not happy in the slightest that, of all recent governments, it would be their own that would balance the books off the back of people living in poverty. As one former senior Labour staffer said to me, “although there wasn’t a rebellion, the cuts to UK aid was the spark that helped light the fuse on the welfare cuts rebellion.”  

How did the other parties react to this news? In short, it was a mixed bag. The Liberal Democrats and SNP (both of whom remain committed to increasing UK aid back to 0.7% of GNI), as well as the Greens (who retain their manifesto pledge to increase UK aid to 1% of GNI by 2033), came out against the cut.  

However, the Conservative Party announced at its party conference that it would cut the aid budget further to just 0.1% of gross national income (c£3 billion) if it returned to power. Then, just last month, the Reform Party announced that it would cut the aid budget to just £1bn a year should it form the next Government. Such scenarios are barely imaginable, given the damage they would cause to development efforts and the UK’s global standing.  

This year was one in which Labour fired a starting gun on a race to the bottom on UK aid cuts, with the Tories and Reform running a tight race to win it outright. This outcome was driven by changing geo-politics, intensifying populism and increased short-termism, which have had a big imprint on the debate about the future of UK aid. It. It is therefore vital that Bond supports the sector to develop and promote narratives on development that respond to and counter these trends,  

Party conference season  

Because of the perilous political landscape, it was all the more important for Bond to use the party conference season to make the case for an ambitious UK agenda on development. Bond was present at four conferences this year, Reform, the Lib Dems, Labour, and the Conservatives.   

Mirroring the politics on UK aid, these conferences were a mixed bag on development issues. We started at the Reform party conference, which Bond attended for the first time, there was little attention on foreign affairs (never mind development) and it is now clear that the Bond’s members face a significant challenge in creating space for positive discussion on our agenda within the party. After the Reform conference, at the Liberal Democrat party conference, Lib Dems in International Development organised a whole day of events on development (one of which was co-hosted by Bond) and MPs and Peers expressed their eagerness to revamp their development policy agenda, including through engagement with Bond members.  

We then attended the Labour party conference, where Bond hosted a development reception (with Labour Campaign for International Development) and an event on the impact of the aid cuts on UK soft power (with Labour Foreign Policy Group), with Baroness Chapman (the Minister for International Development and Africa) speaking at both, alongside a range of supportive MPs. Finally, at Conservative Party conference, we were able to challenge their parties’ proposal to further cut the UK aid budget, at a well-attended reception organised with Conservative Friends of International Development. We were unable to attend the Green Party conference this year, but will be looking to engage next year. 

It was clear from these conferences that Bond and its members have much more to do to develop a caucus of MPs who are committed to development and can champion these issues in parliament and in their own parties. There is no shortcut to securing political influence.   

The budget  

Ahead of the budget, the sector was eager to help head of any potential further cuts to the aid budget.  Bond, members, and allies therefore came together to reach out to key Labour MPs and stakeholders to flag our concerns. We also kept opposition parties informed but urged caution to avoid their interventions making cuts more likely.  

In the end the government chose not to make further cuts. Whilst it’s impossible to know whether these interventions helped avoid any cuts, they helped to demonstrate the political support for aid and development in parliament. The lesson was that it is best to be prepared for the worst, and to use every political moment as an opportunity to deepen engagement with MPs and decision-makers.  

Looking ahead of 2026 

Will the politics on development change in 2026? Maybe. For the better? Maybe, maybe not. They say a week is a long time in politics, so who knows where we’ll be come May and the local elections.   

All we know is that, as a sector, we need to stay strong and keep demanding better of our elected officials. Because, yes, it’s been a tough year, but we’d hate to see what it would have been like without us holding those with power to account.