Room for real political debate on development?

International development sometimes feels like an issue in search of a debate. All three main parties are signed up to meeting the UN target of giving 0.7% of GDP as aid; and politicians of all persuasions seem united in their enthusiasm for initiatives to provide basic health and education to people in the world’s poorest countries.

But this consensus has its own perils.

Whoever wins the election, there will be a massive squeeze on public expenditure. This makes the politics of increasing aid budgets very difficult. So expect to see more aid routed through the FCO, MOD, DECC and other departments, as well as tough debates about what counts as aid.

Also, there may be consensus on how much should be spent on aid, but there isn’t much agreement on what aid is for. Labour has tended to make a strong moral case, while Andrew Mitchell for the Conservatives has been keener to emphasise that development is also in the interests of the UK.

Both arguments are valid, but they also show up real differences between the parties on how development policy would be delivered in practice. Labour made a significant break from the past in establishing DFID as an independent department. The Conservatives would keep DFID separate, but have sent strong signals that they would like its role to be more clearly supportive of the FCO.

And the most difficult issue of all is what the UK should do when domestic economic and political interests are not well aligned with those of the poorest countries. In some ways, aid is the easiest part of the debate for politicians to engage with. Although money is tight now, the aid budget is small fry compared to education or health. It’s much more challenging to take radical action for development in areas like corporate corruption, tax and financial reform; climate change; migration; or defence and security. Let’s hope that the election campaign delivers more real debate on these issues.

ippr’s report Policy coherence and the future of the UK’s international development agenda is available now

Sarah Mulley, ippr