Speeches by Harding.

“Dr Oyewale, in your assessment, where is there scope for greater collaboration between humanitarian agencies or streamlining operations?”

“Well, here we are again. The Liberal Democrats have welcomed the Government’s historic decision to recognise the state of Palestine, which we have long called for. We have welcomed more recent statements of intent, including just 10 days ago in this House, but such statements are utterly hollow without action, especial…”

“If you need to recalibrate, does that mean you may have a sub-pledge on ICF4?”

“You gave very good examples of self-sufficiency and effectiveness. What are some examples from your studies of what reciprocity looks like to the British public?”

“Some people would say it is actually preventing the conflict in the first place because climate change is a creator of conflict.”

“Anouschka, in your report, you found that climate-related ODA can meet the public’s tests more easily than traditional aid, so what specifically makes climate finance more compelling to the public than other forms of overseas spending?”

“What is the timeline for assessing whether it is working?”

“Thank you for being frank. The ICF is in the Government’s national security assessment in January 2026—well, it does not say that there should be a sub-pledge, but it is in the security assessment—but then, as you suggest, to gamble on it does not fill me with confidence.”

“I have one final question. Was that a joined-up decision across Departments?”

“The Government’s spending review identified climate and nature as a top three ODA priority, as you have just said, yet the FCDO is not committed to a nature and forests sub-pledge for ICF4. What is the justification for that decision?”

“I wanted to come back to accounting and your answer to Tracy. The Centre for Global Development believes that “The UK should be clearer in its statistics which ICF projects create assets for the UK and which are pure expenditure.” Sorry if I seem slightly obsessed with the TFFF, but this comes back to that again becaus…”

“It is recoupable, so it therefore could be an asset. Saying that is very different from saying, “There’s a cash transfer of a billion pounds going over here to this fund”. This is a loan that we will recoup so it therefore could be seen as an asset. TFFF aside, that seems a much better way of measuring and accounting f…”

“May I ask you about the TFFF? Why was the decision made not to fund it?”

“With a smaller aid budget, the Government want to be, apparently, more strategic and to be an investor rather than a donor, and yet this is an investor model, which is still not being funded.”

“Hello. The written evidence that we received—particularly that from the NGO sector—is clear that the shrinking ODA budget will require trade-offs around climate intervention and other humanitarian interventions. How will you navigate those trade-offs? What do they look like?”

“You say it is a gamble.”

“Hello. The written evidence that we received—particularly that from the NGO sector—is clear that the shrinking ODA budget will require trade-offs around climate intervention and other humanitarian interventions. How will you navigate those trade-offs? What do they look like?”

“Thank you for being frank. The ICF is in the Government’s national security assessment in January 2026—well, it does not say that there should be a sub-pledge, but it is in the security assessment—but then, as you suggest, to gamble on it does not fill me with confidence.”

“Could you explain more about food security and climate shocks? Do you mean through the yields from a harvest coming to the UK?”

“With a smaller aid budget, the Government want to be, apparently, more strategic and to be an investor rather than a donor, and yet this is an investor model, which is still not being funded.”