If projects such as this are being ended two years early with short notice, it begs serious questions about the UK's commitment to supporting low-income countries as they respond to climate change.

The Trump administration has politicised maternal and sexual health. Not only has it dramatically cut funding, it has also orchestrated a chilling effect on other donor countries.

We are already at one of the most dangerous times in history for humanitarian aid workers and we must ensure that the government does not make things worse.

at a minimum, the bill creates legal uncertainty for humanitarian organisations, which may result in a chilling effect on their activities.

Whilst I fully support measures to strengthen our national security, I am concerned this rushed legislation could have unintended consequences which could impact on UK humanitarian workers.

if the UK is to deliver on it, to help world’s most vulnerable people and to preserve our international reputation then we must ensure that spending does not drop below 0.3 per cent.

This ambiguity sits awkwardly with what I was hearing at last week’s Global Partnerships Conference.

The minister rightly states that international aid both supports those in extreme poverty and boosts our security at home.

Having written to the foreign secretary seeking reassurance on aid spending, this response does not fill me or my committee with confidence.

We must keep the pressure on, to ensure transparency and accountability are embedded throughout this process, with every recommendation fully adopted, and victims and survivors at its centre.

Ring-fenced funding for IICSA is essential - ensuring the money cannot be segued into other government priorities, and to send a clear message that the government is serious about implementation.