International Development Outcomes for Women and Girls

Baroness Helic Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Grand Committee

[Baroness Helic (Con)]

My Lords, I too thank my noble friend Lady Sugg for securing this debate and for her steadfast commitment to women and girls affected by conflict. Conscious of the time limit, I will focus on one issue: conflict-related sexual violence. For survivors, the reduction in official development assistance is not merely an accounting exercise; it determines whether a woman who has been raped receives life-saving medical treatment, protection and a chance of justice. The evidence is clear: we are going backwards.

Physicians for Human Rights has documented the consequences of abrupt reductions in international assistance. Across Ethiopia, DRC, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, clinicians report shortages of post-exposure prophylaxis following rape, interruptions to post-rape care, the closure of one-stop centres and the collapse of referral pathways. Survivors are being denied emergency treatment when they need it most. These are not marginal reductions; they are dismantling the system on which survivors depend, leaving women who have been raped searching in vain for life-saving medicines. As a result, they are becoming victims twice over—first at the hands of those who committed these crimes and then through the withdrawal of the assistance on which their recovery entirely depends.

Political leadership matters too. When my noble friend Lord Hague founded the Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative, he understood that this was not only a humanitarian issue but a strategic one. I had the privilege, as his special adviser, of accompanying him to meetings with Heads of States, Foreign Ministers and other senior leaders. Whatever the purpose of the meeting, he raised this issue. It had an impact, because when a Foreign Secretary speaks, counterparts listen. It becomes a matter of foreign policy and national security. That access to the highest level of government, combined with the authority of the office, gave Britain influence far beyond the resources we committed. It demonstrated that these crimes mattered to our country and that we would work to hold perpetrators to account.

I therefore welcome the Foreign Secretary’s decision to lead the new international coalition to end violence against women and girls, and the recent appointment of the new PSVI special envoy. However, I had hoped that the Foreign Secretary would personally take on this role—not because of the individual appointed, for whom I have the greatest respect, but because the authority of the office sends an unmistakable signal that this remains a foreign policy priority for the United Kingdom. No one disputes the pressures on the public finances, the threat from Russia, the challenges posed by China or the demands on our country at home and abroad, but preventing conflict-related sexual violence is not separate from our foreign policy but an integral part of it. The perpetrators of these crimes watch what we do. When they see retreat, they see opportunity. If we fail to confront this evil where it begins, we will confront its consequences later, with greater instability, displacement, migration and far greater cost. Prevention costs less than crisis management. More importantly, it is the right thing to do.