A defence minister has said the Government will publish its Defence Investment Plan once it is complete, arguing that major spending decisions are already being taken while the document is still being finalised.
Speaking in the House of Lords, the minister said capability choices must reflect both the available budget and the changing demands of future conflict.
He told peers that defence planning requires “decisions about matching the budget to the capabilities they want”, adding that those capabilities must reflect evolving threats and operational lessons.
“These capabilities should be matched to the demands of the future, learning the lessons of Ukraine,” he said.
Responding to questions from the noble and gallant Lord Stirrup, the minister rejected suggestions that the Government had paused defence investment while work continues on the investment plan.
“As I said to the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Stirrup, the Government are not waiting for the defence investment plan before investing billions of pounds in our defence industry across the country, in the ways I laid out,” he said.
The minister pointed to recent procurement decisions as evidence that investment is already taking place, including funding for new helicopter capability.
“I go back to the point about the Leonardos. We did not wait for the defence investment plan to do that: £1 billion is going to be spent to ensure we have helicopters.”
He also referenced ongoing naval shipbuilding activity in Scotland, noting that members of the House of Lords have recently visited shipyards where Royal Navy vessels are under construction.
“Numerous noble Lords have also been to Rosyth and the Clyde and have seen the ships being built there,” he said.
The minister said such programmes demonstrate that defence spending is continuing while the broader investment framework is being developed.
“This Government are investing in our defence industry,” he said, adding that the long-awaited plan will be published once the work is complete.
“The defence investment plan will be published when it is ready.”
I believe this is just an excuse to delay prevaricate and otherwise not commit to anything while at the same time promising the world. Typical politicians then
No, unfortunately it’s worse than that, they do genuinely want it done and their is genuinely a budget increase, they are just too incompetent to get it done and no one in the Treasury will ever trust the MoD again (with good reason) and the Treasury have been too empowered by Rachel Reves and Starmar is too weak to over rule her.
Yep it sounds like all of the defence ministers are unified around the belief that spending needs to increase, but nobody is listening to them. That’s more worrying than the defence ministers themselves not listening IMO.
So, never then.
And the irony of Stirrup asking questions, the guy who did more than anybody to undermine the RN…
This Is excellent stratagy, Kick the can so far down the road, It gets hard to find It again.
What an absolute shambles of a Government we have.
this is getting a bit silly now , i don’t see then having a welfare review and hold back on welfare spending until it is complete.
Yep, seems this Government view defence as luxury spending
i have a rumour when it is published it will be restricted on a need to now basis. so people cant pick holes in it . and for the first time ever vat And things that were never under defence before ls now included.
Is Starmer’s government deliberately prevaricating on the DIP with a view to streamline UK defence? Operating three services is increasingly expensive, and could the Treasury be considering downgrading one of the arms? The Army has already had the starvation treatment under 14 years of Tory irresponsibility, with David Cameron taking Jaguar and Harrier out of service with comments like, ‘We don’t need to be paying for men to be flying around the skies in a financial crisis.’
The parlous state of the British Army could result in a further reduction in manpower and heavy armour. The evidence is there: only 148 CH3 and no medium-term reserve, 14 Archers and no tracked howitzers, and no confirmed Boxer howitzer fleet numbers. Maybe the Army will be mainly infantry with medium-heavy armour support along with towed light guns and MLRS.
Given the length of time it has taken, if it is not a 1000+ paged document, you will have to ask what the hell have they been doing!
The same old spin, deflection, and dare I say half truths.
He points to the Yeovil order for the AW149, which had been blocked by HMT for months until Leonardo literally said, we’re off and the unions held a gun to HMG head.
He points to shipbuilding, not one of which has been ordered by this current government.
WHEN will there be accountability in the Commons, the Lords, or in front of the media, when someone with half a braincell of knowledge can turn around and contradict these people?
““These capabilities should be matched to the demands of the future, learning the lessons of Ukraine,”
Stating the obvious, a HMG speciality. The forces are too small. There. And we need ISTAR and Drones, lots of both. Neither are justification to ignore conventional war fighting kit.
“rejected suggestions that the Government had paused defence investment while work continues on the investment plan.”
Ignores the thrust of the accusation made in reply. Procurement has been in a state of near paralysis for some time.
““As I said to the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Stirrup, the Government are not waiting for the defence investment plan before investing billions of pounds in our defence industry across the country, in the ways I laid out,”
Nice deflection, he knows full well that the questions relate to capability and mass, not industry.
““I go back to the point about the Leonardos. We did not wait for the defence investment plan to do that: £1 billion is going to be spent to ensure we have helicopters.”
23. Replacing how many “my Lord?” I still suspect the 5 Dauphin are for the chop, even Forces news says these helicopters are for the RAF and the Army.
That means a cut. A meagre 23 to keep the factory open, ignoring the “up to 44” originally quoted, and the fact that the 24 Puma being replaced were the new low benchmark after the force had nearly halved through cuts and attrition. There were at least 31 in the mid 2000s.
““Numerous noble Lords have also been to Rosyth and the Clyde and have seen the ships being built there,”
Deflection. How many of those vessels have you ordered? None.
How many Frigates does the RN currently have? 6.
How many were there post 1997 SDSR cuts. 20.
What urgency or confirmation have you given that said force will be increased with a second batch? None.
Curious also that this minister is not named in the article?
Finally, just a reminder about Lord Stirrup, he sat by as CDS when the SDSR 2010 that decimated the forces was underway.
And now “Up to £40,000 to get Illegal families to leave.
Not sure how many times a year they will be able to leave again and again though !
I think the face of conflict is changing so quickly it must be very difficult to predict what type of arm forces and equipment will be needed in the future. A very flexible policy is needed which is very alien to the MOD.
I think that’s right. They are trying to hit a moving target. Ukraine and the Gulf show how easy it is, using drones and ballistic missiles, for a determined adversary to put the UK on a very expensive defensive war footing. Quantity has a strategic quality of its own. Re-activate Henry VIII coastal forts?
Well, it should have been published months ago, so this being held back because Iran is just a lie from the minister.
In the mean time we have little to no amphibious shipping to evacuate the British Ex-Pats in the Middle East, Just 1 SSN at sea (on a swan run in the Pacific), 4 out of 6 DD’s sitting in dock. Just 2 Frigates capable of going to sea, the RFA on strike as they are being treated like slaves.
An army with every battalion at 1/2 to 3/4 strength, the Ajax fiasco far from over and looking to cost god knows how much to put right, Recruitment taking on average 18 months just to start basic training.
The RAF with less than 100 front-line fighters, a transport fleet that has been cut to in half with the loss of the C130 and the list goes on and on and on_________
We need the money now to invest in just the basics then we need more money to invest in getting the UK’s armed forces up to a credible level so that they can actually defend the UK.
Insight like that is why they get paid the big bucks
Its simple so much has been added to the defence budget that the tiny increase will not cover it. On pape it looks like we spending more but we are not more has been added to budget its an accounting trick.
Delaying the DIP gives the Government time to save some money is should be spending on kit, to later spend on less kit but in one big lump sum again an accounting trick.
We are a laughing stock around the world, We can not even defend one RAF base properly. Its embarrassing.
Nobody expects the DIP to be published before it is ready. What people are annoyed about is that it is taking so long to be ready.
It is also ridiculous that they keep writing about the DIP in the third person as if it is completely out of their hands like the SDR was; if ministers are not closely involved in writing it, it won’t have political backing and will be a useless document.
Ok, when the DIP is ready, what will it at the most contain? This is just a guess by some not as learned as many on here. Buys for the following kit may be, RCH 155 may 120, a tracked IFV or turreted wheeled BOXER IFV, More Ajax variants over watch etc , GBAD both long range and gun, some Boxer based air defence variant, A replacemnt for 432’s which be wheeled, incresse in navy escorts and attack sub and some F35’As, and may be arming P8s with surface strike and some sort buy of lotering drones.
Happy for any one to pick fault but that is about the best we might get. Aside replacement for the SA80A3 and on going Light gun replacement project and other things already hinted at.
We will likely get a lot less than that dressed up in double speak and smoke and mirrors.
So the DIP is not going to ready until it’s ready? Well, who would have thought. What a bunch. Anyone have the guts to watch Reeves on Monday congratulating herself on defence. £650 miilion for Typhoon upgrades which were planned over a year ago; A frigate ordered by the Tories launched; a couple of hundred million on something I can’t remember. Brilliant. Where’s the extra money Rachel? Do tell.
One very interesting bit of context to the DIP as a 10 year plan.. is china is in the middle of its next five year plan presentation.. this happens in stages but for the keen Chinese watcher one of the big flags of which way china is going is it’s economic growth target.. one of the things china has been doing over the last 2 five year plans is sacrificing growth opportunities for essentially creating war resilience.. essentially it diverts effort from expanding and exploring markets, to Harding and internalising its economy and spending on security and defence infrastructure instead of profit based infrastructure.. Ross Babbage who’s done a particular study of this estimated that china had sacrificed 1-2% growth a year over its last 2 5 year plans.
So which way china moves it’s Economic growth targets tells you is china feeling happy and planning for wide open trade development and putting its efforts into growth.. or is it feeling the geostrategic headwinds are heading for conflict and is it reducing investment in growth to invest in war/conflict hardening.. and it’s dropped it’s target down to 4.5% this is essentially the lowest in 35 years..it also stated it will “resolutely striking at Taiwan independence and secessionist forces”… not a good sign.. although I think it’s seen an in with the present US administration as has moderated it language a lot.. I think china thinks it has a chance of negotiations with the US administration on who gets what share of the world moving forward. It’s still increasing its “PUBLISHED” fantasy defence budget ( following its paradigm of hide your strength) by 7% a year.
Just a bit of context on the DIP in regards to one of our most significant geostrategic competitors.
“Decisions about matching the budget to the capabilities they want”, adding that those capabilities must reflect evolving threats and operational lessons. So, it must be quite obvious that the budget has to be increased if Defence capability is to be improved to match the increasing threat. So, what is taking so long? Does the Treasury work for the PM or is the PM working for the Treasury? The PM needs spend more time in the UK and urgently cut through this bureaucracy of endless meetings, re-evaluations, revised papers and force through decisions. There isn’t a magic answer out their which we just havn’t found. If the Government will not find the cash for Defence just tell the voters that we cannot afford proper Defence or that cuts are required elsewhere. Don’t try and claim we can do it all with a few small cuts and reduced numbers of manpower, weapons, missiles, aircraft, ships and armour.
I think the Treasury will tell you the government aren’t sufficiently to heel yet, but they’re working on it.