This report examines the Government’s plans for a real terms increase of 37% in official aid spending in the four years to 2015. The report does not address humanitarian aid for relief of acute distress following conflict, famine, natural disasters or other emergencies, which is less than 10% of official aid spending. This inquiry has shown that finding ways to realise the simple ambition of reducing poverty by means of development aid is hugely challenging. Economic growth is essential if poverty is to be reduced. There is however no agreement amongst experts as to the effectiveness of development aid in promoting growth. There is far from universal agreement amongst experts as to what the aim of aid should be or forms of aid are the most effective. There is also disagreement as to what is the best way to channel aid and whether aid should focus on those countries where poverty is most acute - often where without better governance, aid will prove a waste of time or worse. Yet further, there is disagreement as to whether aid is a tool enabling donor countries to combat corruption and bring about internal peace, or whether it tends to feed corruption and sustain damaging internal conflicts. Expert opinion is however virtually united in agreement that DFID enjoys an outstanding reputation internationally as an effective aid agent. The Committee makes recommendations designed to improve DFID’s performance further. In particular it is feared that, sometimes, it is pursuing various good objectives that are likely to prove mutually incompatible