Thank you, Sara, and thank you to ODI Global, Action Against Hunger and Shabaka for bringing us together.
\n\nCongratulations as well on the two reports being launched tonight.
\n\nThe question you’ve asked is pertinent. What should we do when we can see a hunger crisis looming?
\n\nBecause right now, we can all see it.
\n\nGlobally, emergency levels of food insecurity are already high across the hotspots, including Sudan, Somalia and Yemen.
\n\nConflict around the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea is pushing up the cost of moving fuel and fertiliser around the world.
\n\nMany governments are struggling with high debt and have limited resources to respond. The humanitarian system, including WFP, is hugely overstretched.
\n\nAnd we know a “super” El Niño is building, threatening harvests, from the Horn of Africa, across the continent and beyond, piling pressure on already stressed countries and economies.
\n\nThe warning lights are flashing red.
\n\nNot just because the risks are severe, but because we are in a state of compounding pressures, the impacts of which will continue to roll out across the world in different ways in the months ahead.
\n\nThese are not one-off risks. Not least as climate change and ecosystem stresses deepen, and as geopolitical tensions and conflicts endure.
\n\nThese compound, recurring pressures demand a reset in how we think about preparedness, prevention and resilience.
\n\nAs I have said before, this is the issue that keeps me awake at night. And this is the one where our failings as global policymakers are most painfully exposed.
\n\nToo often food insecurity is treated as a humanitarian problem, or at best a development one.
\n\nBut tonight I want to argue that hunger is really about power and, like all questions about power, it is intensely political.
\n\nFood prices shape living standards everywhere. They shape whether people trust that the system works for them. And they can shape the stability of governments, here in Europe as well as across Africa and the Global South.
\n\nThis is not, therefore, just a question for me as the Development Minister. It is a question for every single minister in this new Government, which today marks its 100th day in office.
\n\nFrom the start we have been asking how power can be more fairly shared, and how the systems meant to provide for and protect people can work for everyone.
\n\nThis political understanding of power will be at the heart of this Labour Government’s approach. Nowhere is more urgent than when thinking about food – the stuff of life itself.
\n\nSo tonight I want to talk to you about three things.
\n\nFirstly, how we should think of food as part of our wider understanding of security.
\n\nSecondly, how we can only really do this if we recognise how much inequality and power plays out through food and hunger - within and between countries.
\n\nAnd thirdly, what this government is doing as it sees global food insecurity risks looming. In fact, what we need to do together – for immediate response and long term resilience.
\n\nSome of you were with me at SOAS last month, when I gave a speech hosted by the New Economics Foundation and set out five securities that will guide my work as Development Minister.
\n\nHealth security, climate security, human security, economic security and food security.
\n\nTonight I want to begin with food.
\n\nI said then that the five securities are connected – I don’t think I need to persuade anyone here of that.
\n\nFood security is climate security. The weather is one of the biggest variables on the world’s dinner plate.
\n\nIt is health security. Malnutrition underlies a huge share of ill health and is one of the biggest killers of young children.
\n\nIt is economic security. Increased food prices are what people feel first and often most acutely, and they can drive debt, migration and unrest.
\n\nAnd it is human security. Hunger is central to humanitarian need – both a cause and a consequence of conflict, and too often a deliberate tactic of war.
\n\nI said at SOAS that I see these issues through a security lens because it forces us to think about risks that cross borders and about the interests we share.
\n\nSo let me apply that to food.
\n\nMany of you talk about food systems precisely because you know that a harvest in East Africa, a shipping lane in the Gulf and a supermarket shelf in Britain are connected.
\n\nAnd if we share a system, we share its risks.
\n\nWe depend on the same harvests, ecosystems and fertiliser supply chains, we share the need to protect our soils and rivers, we share the same global trading system.
\n\nNo country is insulated, including ours.
\n\nWhen the Black Sea closes or Hormuz is disrupted, a family in Khartoum and a family in my constituency of Midlothian both feel it.
\n\nThey don’t feel it in the same way or to the same degree, but they are both experiencing the effects of the same economic forces, because they and we are connected.
\n\nIf we share a system, we also share its opportunities.
\n\nAs agricultural trade has grown, so too has our collective ability to withstand shocks. Open and predictable markets allow more food to move from places of surplus to places of need, helping to keep shelves stocked, businesses supplied and prices more stable.
\n\nThat’s what a global food system means. Our interdependence isn’t optional. It’s how we feed ourselves. It’s part of our human connection.
\n\nYou will have seen in recent days there has been a lot of discussion of how we can - and should - all play a part in increasing our national resilience through being prepared. Prevention must go alongside preparedness.
\n\nIn fact, that was one of the central messages of the UK’s Nature Security Assessment.
\n\nIts conclusion was clear. Our national resilience depends on natural systems far beyond our shores. Forests, soils, freshwater systems and oceans help regulate rainfall, water availability and growing conditions across global agricultural regions.
\n\nIf the Congo Basin rainforest declines, food production falls across the Sahel.
\n\nWhen those systems come under pressure – including from how the world produces food - we face falling harvests, growing competition for food and resources, and increased prices.
\n\nProtecting and restoring systemically important natural systems is not an optional extra: it is part of protecting our food security and our national resilience.
\n\nSo this is why I wanted to come here tonight. Because I am trying to recruit you.
\n\nThe community gathered here now has done an extraordinary job mobilising concern over many decades about hunger as a development challenge.
\n\nAnd it’s precisely because I know how effective you can be when you research, campaign and communicate that I want us all to be part of reshaping how the world thinks about food security.
\n\nThe world currently produces enough food.
\n\nSupply still matters, especially in many places in Africa where yields are low and productivity is in reverse as climate catastrophes hit, the soil degrades and water becomes scarcer.
\n\nEnsuring global food production becomes more sustainable and adapts in the face of climate change and other pressures will be one of the defining challenges of our generation - one the UK already supports through our science, agri-tech and investment.
\n\nBut hunger is not simply an issue of supply.
\n\nIt is about who can access nutritious food, at what price, and who goes without. It is about which farmers, businesses and economies can withstand the next drought, flood or price spike.
\n\nThat makes hunger fundamentally a story of inequality, between and within countries.
\n\nBetween countries, those that heavily import food, carry heavy debts or are fragile pay more. They have less access to the inputs, technology, and private capital helping others to move forward.
\n\nWithin countries, the poorest households spend the biggest share of their income on food. It’s as true in Scotland as it is in Somalia.
\n\nAnd while women produce much of the world’s food, too often when food is scarce or money is tight, it is women and girls who eat least and eat last.
\n\nTime and again, when you look deeply at questions of food, hunger and nutrition you find you’re really looking at questions of poverty and inequality.
\n\nAnd therefore of power.
\n\nThat’s the story I want your help to tell.
\n\nI was born in the 1980s, when the slogan on the t-shirts was simple: feed the world.
\n\nForty years on, the challenge is more complex, and our language and approach to development have rightly moved on.
\n\nBut I want to be honest with you about how I feel when I look at where we are on hunger.
\n\nI don’t feel sad. I feel furious.
\n\nLast year, an estimated 645 million people went hungry, day in, day out. A third of humanity couldn’t afford a healthy diet. In Africa, two in every three people.
\n\nOn top of that sit the 35 million children who are acutely malnourished, nearly 10 million of them so severely that without treatment they could die.
\n\nAnd last year, for the first time, famine was confirmed in two places in the same year. With more places remaining at risk of famine. In a world that grows enough food for everyone.
\n\nLet’s not pretend any of this is bad luck. In the 21st century people make famine.
\n\nIn Sudan, towns like El Fasher and Kadugli have been besieged, markets have been attacked, aid convoys blocked, and more than 140 volunteers killed for the crime of helping feed their neighbours.
\n\nIn Gaza, when some aid was finally let in, the number of children treated for acute malnutrition fell from seventeen thousand a month at its peak, to under three thousand less than a year later.
\n\nHunger on that scale and intensity follows decisions. So does recovery.
\n\nBut it isn’t only war. The quieter scandal is a global food system that leaves billions behind.
\n\nA healthy diet is out of reach for nearly three billion people because incomes are too low, growth is too weak, and nutritious food costs too much to produce, store and get to market.
\n\nMarkets steer away from risk and towards returns. That isn’t a conspiracy. But it is a market failure, and choosing not to fix it is a political choice.
\n\nWhether by siege or by inaction, hunger is a political outcome. That should make every one of us angry.
\n\nBut anger is a fuel, not a strategy.
\n\nSo let me come to your question – what do we do?
\n\nWe are not powerless in the face of this.
\n\nI know it can feel that way. The headlines are relentless. Aid budgets and the humanitarian system are under pressure. And it is tempting to conclude that the UK’s best days of shaping the world are behind us.
\n\nI don’t accept that.
\n\nThis isn’t nostalgia, or an illusion that we can fix the world alone. It’s an honest account of what we bring: a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, one of the world’s widest diplomatic networks, a long record as a partner and investor in development, and institutions and expertise the world turns to, including many in this room.
\n\nThat’s real power. The question is whether we have the confidence to use it.
\n\nUnder this Government, we will.
\n\nAnd we’ll use it with others: through the G20 and G7, and closer to Europe, building effective coalitions that turn shared risk into shared action.
\n\nHere is what that means in practice.
\n\nIt starts with resilience at home.
\n\nAround 60 per cent of the food we consume here in the UK is produced here. That strong domestic food base is a source of resilience, but we cannot take it for granted.
\n\nThat is why we are working with our farmers, businesses and civil society to strengthen preparedness for future shocks.
\n\nIt is why we have established a Food Preparedness Group to work with the industry to identify resilience gaps, improve planning and ensure we are better prepared for acute risks to our food system.
\n\nAnd ensuring the resilience of global markets, supply chains, and natural ecosystems that underpin food production is fundamental to our long-term security.
\n\nSecond, as global actors, we are focused on turning warning into action.
\n\nThis speaks to the heart of your question this evening.
\n\nEvidence shows most food crises are not sudden. 33 countries have appeared in every edition of the Global Report on Food Crises for a decade. That isn’t an unpredictable emergency.
\n\nWe don’t lack warnings – we know the El Nino is currently gathering pace.
\n\nWhat we lack is a better route from warning to global system action.
\n\nToo often climate, conflict, blockades, displacement and other risks to food security are analysed separately, even though markets and communities experience them together.
\n\nWorse, too often the analysis is in one room, the money in another and the political will in a third – none of it moving fast enough.
\n\nSo we are pushing for a shared picture of the evolving risks – with FAO and WFP in the lead.
\n\nFor pre-arranged finance that enables the right action.
\n\nFor the risks to be routinely considered and acted upon by those who control the finance and policy – governments, UN agencies, IFIs, insurers – with greater coordination.
\n\nAs an active member of the Global Network against Food Crises, we rally behind specific countries sounding the alarm, as we did with Somalia earlier this year.
\n\nAnd there should be greater transparency of all players – we need accountability in the system when warnings go unheeded.
\n\nIn Bangkok this month, the Foreign Secretary pressed the international financial institutions to use their crisis toolkits, insurance and pre-arranged finance – we will continue to push.
\n\nAnd we are moving our own bilateral money earlier too. Last month I announced up to £15 million for anticipatory action in multiple countries ahead of El Niño, vaccinating livestock and getting cash assistance to farmers before shocks hit, not after.
\n\nBecause humanitarian action is changing.
\n\nWorking closely with ODI and many others in this room - we support reforms to change how the international humanitarian system works.
\n\nReforms that recognise local action matters. Local organisations are first responders, but often the last to be funded. Resources, decision making and accountability must move closer to affected populations.
\n\nSuch as in Sudan, where the UK is supporting volunteer-led Emergency Response Rooms which run community kitchens that feed millions, and they reach people no international agency can. Our job is to back them and protect them.
\n\nBecause action must also be political
\n\nAssistance that can’t get through saves no one. Aid alone cannot stop the conflict that drives hunger.
\n\nWe will use all the diplomatic levers we have, including our seat on the UN Security Council, to prevent conflict, support mediation, call for a lasting ceasefire for Hormuz, press for access, protect civilians and humanitarian workers, and hold to account those who deliberately starve civilians.
\n\nThat’s harder and slower than emergency relief. But it’s what stops the next crisis becoming the next famine.
\n\nIn all of this, we must put nutrition at the centre.
\n\nIn fragile countries, children slip in and out of acute malnutrition with every drought, price spike and displacement. We must break that cycle.
\n\nAs co-chair of the Action Review Panel on Child Wasting, which meets next month, I will keep pushing partners to deliver on what they have promised. And as a founding partner of the Child Nutrition Fund, we have helped mobilise more than one billion dollars for the countries with the highest burdens of undernutrition.
\n\nNone of this is the UK acting alone. But none of it happens without countries prepared to lead. We will be one of them, and we want you with us.
\n\nAnd, critically, we must focus attention on longer-term action for resilience and prevention
\n\nI said earlier that compound and recurrent pressures require long-term, systemic solutions not one-off fixes.
\n\nNowhere is that more important than in fragile and conflict-affected countries.
\n\nThese are often the places where poverty is concentrated and international finance and systems struggle hardest to reach.
\n\nThey are where action to restore degraded land and reduce competition over scarce resources reduces instability.
\n\nSo resilience has to be built from the ground up. It means strengthening the systems that people rely on, including social protection systems, land ownership.
\n\nIt means backing collective, locally led action and capacity.
\n\nLast month, I met co-operatives working in Palestine, Ukraine, Kenya and Sudan.
\n\nThese are very different contexts. But the lesson was remarkably similar.
\n\nWhere communities are organised, where producers can pool risk, access markets and retain value locally, they are better able to withstand shocks.
\n\nIt is a lesson we also recognise here in the UK. Co-operative models can strengthen resilience, support local growth and help ensure that more value remains in the communities that create it.
\n\nAnd as climate change advances, supporting resilient food systems, means investing in the fundamentals. Healthy soils and reliable water, resilient crops and supply chains, and functioning ecosystems.
\n\nWe must combine local knowledge with the best that science, innovation and investment can offer.
\n\nThrough CGIAR and other partners, UK science is helping to develop crops that can withstand drought and heat, and to protect livestock from disease.
\n\nBrazil shows us what can be achieved when innovation, investment and political will come together. Brazil has become a leader in bio-inputs and support for family farmers, creating better conditions for thousands of producers, while helping to reduce reliance on fossil fuel-based fertilisers.
\n\nOur shared ambition feeds practical cooperation: together, we launched the Belém Declaration on Fertilisers, together we shaped the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty. Indeed, we must work with everyone who shapes the food system, including farmers, communities, businesses, traders, and investors.
\n\nBecause building resilient and regenerative food systems at scale requires partnership across the whole value chain.
\n\nThat includes promoting trade that supports workers’ rights to ensure that the people who grow our food are paid fairly and can live with dignity.
\n\nUltimately, there is a bigger prize here.
\n\nA modern, resilient food system that works for everyone can create jobs, improve access to nutritious diets, drive growth and strengthen security of supply.
\n\nAnd I am optimistic about what is possible.
\n\nThe advances in crop science, digital technology, alternative fertilisers are creating opportunities that simply did not exist a decade ago. Africa has a vibrant agrifood investment environment.
\n\nThe task now is to make sure the opportunities reach the countries and communities that need them most.
\n\nThat is how we move beyond responding to one crisis after another.
\n\nAnd it is how we build food systems that are more resilient, more regenerative and more just.
\n\nLet me finish where I started.
\n\nFood security is security.
\n\nHunger is about power as well as resilient supply.
\n\nAnd there is a huge prize here waiting to be seized, if we can use the G20, the G7 and our wider influence through our seats in the UN, on MDBs Boards and as an increasingly close European partner strategically to transform the food system.
\n\nThe UK has influence, networks, science and institutions that can make a difference – many represented in this room.
\n\nBut we can’t do it alone, and we don’t want to.
\n\nSo my ask of you is this:
\n\nBring your evidence, your ideas and your voice. Hold us to account.
\n\nAnd work with us to make the case for an ambitious agenda on food security in every room where the decision makers meet.
\n\nThank you.
\nThe Minister of State has responsibility for:
\n\nAfrica
\ndevelopment and humanitarian
\ninternational finance
\nclimate and energy security
\n