Speeches by Harding.

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

“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.”

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

“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?”

“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…”

“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…”

“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?”

“When you say that the public think that we are spending a lot more on aid than we actually are, do you have any figures for what they think we are spending on aid?”

“You say it is a gamble.”

“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?”

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

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

“You say it is a gamble.”

“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?”

“What does transparency look like? You have talked about the effects that the people you polled saw, but what about the transparency? You talked about effectiveness as well. Is there some anxiety about the transparency of where the money is going and how it is being spent?”

“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?”

“The “polluter pays” principle commands two thirds support. What did your focus groups tell you about how the public expects that principle to be enforced and by whom?”

“When you say that the public think that we are spending a lot more on aid than we actually are, do you have any figures for what they think we are spending on aid?”

“What does transparency look like? You have talked about the effects that the people you polled saw, but what about the transparency? You talked about effectiveness as well. Is there some anxiety about the transparency of where the money is going and how it is being spent?”