Launched in 2015 in response to the escalating threat of drug-resistant infections, the Fleming Fund aimed to strengthen AMR surveillance in low- and middle-income countries. Extensive research shows that AMR is linked to approximately 35,000 deaths each year in the UK and nearly five million globally. Without urgent action, this toll could rise to as many as 40 million deaths annually by 2050.

Closing the programme without a clear succession plan risks weakening the UK’s biosecurity. Antimicrobial resistance does not respect national borders, and the NHS is not immune to the spread of resistant infections originating overseas. International travel, migration, and cross-border clinical referrals mean that drug-resistant organisms acquired abroad can and do reach UK healthcare settings.

Cutting global AMR programmes like the Fleming Fund is a false economy. While the burden of antimicrobial resistance falls most heavily on lower-income countries, the economic impact is global. Research by the Center for Global Development shows that sustained investment in innovation and equitable access to treatment could boost the global economy by nearly US$ 1 trillion by 2050, a return that far outweighs the cost of action.

We therefore urge the Government to explain why such a widely respected global AMR programme is being closed and to set out whether an alternative model or replacement is being considered, as BSAC President, Professor Andrew Seaton, explains;

“The UK has a proud track record of leadership in the global response to AMR. It is vital that we maintain a coherent, long-term strategy for investment in AMR surveillance, laboratory infrastructure, stewardship, education, and training. BSAC’s expert network stands ready to partner with UK Government on every aspect of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) at home and abroad.”

Professor Adam Dixon, the Adam Smith Chair at Adam Smith’s Panmure House, part of Edinburgh Business School, offered the following assessment:

“The premature closure of the Fleming Fund not only jeopardises years of progress in global AMR surveillance, but also sends the wrong signal about the UK’s commitment to international health security. We risk losing vital partnerships, data, and trust at a time when global cooperation on AMR has never been more critical.”

Given the severity of the threat posed by antimicrobial resistance, we urge the Government to clearly articulate its vision for the UK’s role in the global response. It must also set out how it intends to sustain international collaboration and investment to tackle one of the gravest challenges facing global health and security today.