Question follow-through · 92338
Development Aid
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 17 November to Question 88055 on Humanitarian Aid, whether a specific proportion of the Official Development Assistance budget is ring-fenced for th
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
- Tabled
- 18 Nov 2025
- Target answer date
- 20 Nov 2025
- Answer
- 26 Nov 2025 · 8 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
18 Nov 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 17 November to Question 88055 on Humanitarian Aid, whether a specific proportion of the Official Development Assistance budget is ring-fenced for th
20 Nov 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
26 Nov 2025
Answer published
Data on Official Development Assistance (ODA) spend for the requested period is published in the Statistics on International Development on GOV.UK, and is broken down by sector, including for humanitarian aid. Further information and annual reviews on spe...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.