Why Labour must put development at the heart of a progressive foreign policy

For progressives, the electoral prospects of next year look bright. Heading into an election year, the Labour party is currently leading the Conservatives by 20 points in the polls and have gone from strength to strength in by-election after by-election. And while advisers are at pains to stress that the Labour leadership is anything but cavalier about their chances, the Labour party does increasingly look like a government in waiting.

This means that now is the time to think about how a Labour government might govern and what the policy platform will be. And while it is true to say that elections are not won on foreign policy, it is nevertheless important to think critically about what a progressive foreign policy agenda should look like if we are to have a Labour government a year from now.

In his speech to Chatham House earlier this year, Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy set out the test that will underpin all of Labour’s foreign policy choices, which is whether those choices help hardworking families in a world where the barriers between foreign and domestic policy are breaking down. However, where I would argue that there is scope for more ambition is on Labour’s vision for international development as a critical part of their foreign policy agenda. A return to spending 0.7% of GNI on official development assistance (ODA) would be a significant step in the right direction, although it is understandable that Labour wants to make this contingent on domestic economic performance given the financial situation they could be inheriting. Yet, the point remains that more could and should be done to set out a more ambitious vision for development as a core component of a progressive foreign policy.

Spending money abroad to support hardworking families at home may seem counterintuitive, yet international development is one of the most cost-effective ways of investing in British national security, prosperity, and global leadership.

In today’s complex world, those that argue we should spend more on the military but cut the aid budget have misunderstood the nature of the threats Britain faces. Our security is threatened by malign state and non-state actors, including terrorism and other dissident groups. We know that investing in communities in developing countries makes it far harder for these groups to gain a foothold and recruit and expand their operations globally. When the UK pulls out programmes in countries like Nigeria or Somalia, this only strengthens groups like Boko Haram and Al Shabab who are only too pleased to fill the vacuum. I was fortunate enough to visit Lebanon and Jordan last year where I saw first-hand the importance of British development assistance in countering the recruitment efforts of groups such as Hezbollah and ISIS. UK aid is helping to deny these extremists a space to flourish which is clearly in all our interest and should be central to any progressive foreign policy.

Utilising development assistance to invest in climate change mitigation and adaptation globally should also be central to any progressive foreign policy platform. This is not just the right thing to do, as the world’s poorest communities who have contributed the least to climate change continue to feel the harshest effects of a warming planet, but it is also central to UK future prosperity and security. You only have to look at one
of the most contentious domestic policy issues of today, migration, to see how important development assistance for climate change will be. According to the Institute for Economics and Peace, unabated climate change could result in as many as 1.2 billion climate refugees by 2050. That is compared to a UN estimate of around 117 million displaced people in 2023. If progressives are serious about a long-term and sustainable solution for migration to the UK, such an approach must have development at its heart.

This brings me to consider what a foreign policy platform with development at the heart might look like. A Labour Government should prioritise restoring Britain’s global reputation as a soft power superpower and return to spending 0.7% of GNI on ODA. Development flies the flag for Britain around the world and a progressive foreign policy should make the most of Britain’s global assets. It should also mean a wholesale rethink about how we utilise ODA. We must move away from a situation in which ODA is being used to plug gaps, particularly at the Home Office. Instead, we should invest our aid carefully, strategically and coherently focusing on programmes where we know we can deliver results both at home and abroad. This will include better ringfencing of core ODA funding, better long-term strategic direction for how and where we spend our ODA funding, and legislating to put core priorities, including climate change, at the heart of our foreign policy.

Crucially, we must not back away from the argument that investing in development is both about safeguarding our domestic interests, but also fundamentally the right thing to do. As David Lammy has stated the goal must always be to have charity begin at home but to not have it end there. Labour has a strong and proud tradition of internationalism and a progressive Labour foreign policy should be unashamed to say as much and thoroughly reject the argument that we cannot be focused on global poverty reduction while also tackling pressing economic issues at home. We can and must do both. That is what it means for Britain to be a force for good in the world.