DFID managed its portfolio with far greater efficiency than the Foreign Office. But it should improve how it aligns traditional aid objectives with Britain’s goals.
For the first time in decades the levers of British influence – defence, diplomacy, aid and trade – could sit alongside domestic efforts in education and infrastructure.
A separate department was right for the stable, hopeful 1990s. But the years have presented various challenges for which it is less well-suited.
Don’t expect Downing Street to bother too much about what MPs or the media think as it prepares to shake up government and Whitehall.
We should measure the success of our aid programmes by the good we achieve, not simply by the amount of money we spend.
The new Chancellor should stick to the basics of cutting taxes, spending more on education and rebalancing growth outside of London.
He is the only candidate who can further the work of the project to which Esther McVey and I are so committed.
It’s so much more than charity: it bolsters our diplomacy and nurtures trading partners and military allies around the world.
This is a contribution to the debate – now let’s see what the candidates offer during the week ahead.
His critics claim his appointment as International Development Secretary “could lead to the death of thousands of the world’s poorest people”.
There are clearly dangers in accepting the terms set out by green activists – who essentially argue that we can only protect the environment by slowing growth.
He suggests that Western observers very often misread the situation in developing countries in a manner which deprives the latter of agency and opportunity.
Africa is home to 16 per cent of the world’s population, and this is set to double by 2050. Its GDP is expected to reach $3.2 trillion in the next five years.