The resignation of John Healey as Defence Secretary over the funding behind the Defence Investment Plan is “a grave moment” that the government must treat with the utmost seriousness, the chair of the House of Commons Defence Committee has said.
The committee issued a statement on Thursday in response to Healey’s departure, with its chair, the Labour MP for Slough Tan Dhesi, paying tribute to the outgoing Defence Secretary as “a serious, committed and respected” holder of the office who had “understood the scale of the threats facing the UK” and the urgent need to strengthen the armed forces. Members across the committee, Dhesi said, would recognise his dedication to service personnel and “his determination to make the case for defence”, adding: “We thank him for his service.”
The weight of the statement, though, sits in its verdict on what the resignation reveals. “That a Defence Secretary of his integrity and commitment has felt compelled to resign in response to the inadequacy of the proposed defence settlement is a grave moment,” Dhesi said. “The Government must take that warning with the utmost seriousness.”
The committee also restated its own position on the spending question at the heart of the row, with Dhesi saying it had been clear that investment in defence “must be accelerated to reach 3% of GDP by the end of this Parliament”, the same headmark Healey set out in his resignation letter, and that the Defence Investment Plan “cannot be delayed further or used to disguise hard choices”. The plan, he said, “must be affordable, deliverable and fully funded, with credible timelines and proper parliamentary scrutiny”, adding that the armed forces, the defence industry, allies “and adversaries alike” needed to see the United Kingdom “matching its words on national security with the resources required to deliver.”
The statement puts Parliament’s principal defence scrutiny body alongside the outgoing Defence Secretary on the central question of the row, with Healey having written to the Prime Minister on Thursday that the settlement he was shown on Monday afternoon was backloaded, would reach just 2.68 per cent of GDP by 2030 against the three per cent he had pressed for, and would force decisions that “could make the country less safe.”
We Sikh answers that’s for sure.
It’s fair to say that Starmer now has essentially at worst 9 days and at best about 2 weeks before he’s challenged for the leadership of the party and when that happens he is gone as is reaves.
If Burnham losses the bye election the challenge will come the next day.. if Burnham wins it will be the week after, when his arse first hits the seat at Westminster.
I hope that the new leader will actually step up to the 3% challenge especially as it’s going to now be toxic not to.
They could sell tickets In the Viewing Gallery, that ought to raise a few bob.
I have zero confidence Burnham will increase Defense Spending. If anything, the opposite.
No one in the establishment and media complex cares about defence. Neither about Nowak and the Somali headhunter.
Now if this was some bad thing Trump said instead…
Ah yes, Trump
“Iran want a deal badly”
Now repeat 38 times ! 😁😁😁
God bless erm ….God/Trump
How about Tan Dhesi for Defence Secretary?
He comes across as a man of honour, as do Sikhs generally.
Maybe, in which case he would refuse the job knowing there is no increase in spending coming in the foreseeable future. He would just be rearranging the deck chairs!
I imagine if he could be given firm reassurances that money would be found Healey might be quite happy to return as Defence Secretary in a post-Starmer government. He’s gained a lot of credibility by resigning without having to hand out the DIP and despite leaning towards Labour spin he seems to have been reasonably well regarded in the job.
Depending on quite how much he is liked in Labour he might even make a good Foreign Secretary, perhaps. Just so long as Pollard doesn’t take over the MoD.
Well, World Cup starts tonight.
A welcome distraction. Maybe they’ll “bury the DIP” when England play!
Yes, Healey has gone up immeasurably in my book.
Anyone who publically blames, names and shames HMG on defence in a high profile manner I can respect, as long as it’s not a Tory.
Maybe if Reeves believes it’s possible to run the UK defence on a shoestring she should take the job on, though there’s a good chance she’d be known as the person that murdered our military. In other cuts I hear she’ll be replacing Guy Fawkes as the new dummy on top of the fire come November.
Labour back bench MP claiming Tempest been scrapped to fund Net Zero .
Haha, that will be the end of cooperation with Italians and Japanese. It will be hell to pay.
Well it is quite clear that the Government are trying to role back on their defence commitments and have spent it all on housing ileagal mugrants and funds for large families instead of defending the country.
I dont think you will have a country in 20 years…it will be like Lebanon.
If there was any one with a set in No10 they would ask Healey to reconsider his resignation and tell the bean counter next door to get the funds available to get the country up to the 3% GDP (as agreed with NATO) asap. If the bean counter next door really wants to be of any value to the country she could look at the wastage throughout government as well as the MoD and maybe get rid of a few of the companies that seemed to be entwined into No11’s books like Capita who seem to be running most of the governments financial departments from DWP payments, PIP Payments, Veterans payments, Civil service payments just about all payments of current and ex government personnel. In all cases most have to wait for payments for over a year. And yet she refuses to help defend the country but is willing to turn a blind eye on inept companies destroying any credibility in the UK’s ability to pay people who have worked for the government for most of their lives.
Good Evening,
With this resignation I think it is time for all parties to come together to decide an agreed Defence policy in these dir times!
On this site we have raised our concerns over the inept disconcerns of politicians etc to no avail.
We are in a dire situation almost one can say at war!
Wake up before it’s to late! It’s time to make decisions now Mr Starmer!
I do applaud Healey for his honesty and integrety but I am not the least surprised that once again the country has been let down on defence. Not by Healy but by Starmer. If you intend to lead an organisation you have to lead from the front. Too many ministers and mp’s have got away with too much. We are just about to witness what is probably the twentieth U turn. Starmer has to go but who will replace him TO GIVE US HOPE? Burhham, who shows no sign of making any chnges apart from moving further to the left; Streeting who seems to have stepped back (?); Milliband (God help us). These are apparently the three frontrunners so defence spending is going to be somewhere below pot holes in importance.
Funding problems? Easily solved. Rejoin the EU to boost the economy by @£250 -300 billion,
Reeves’ fiscal rules kowtowed so deeply to the markets that the Chancellor hasn’t been able to stand on her own two feet again. She claimed she wanted growth, but has no growth target. Instead she has deficit and inflation targets, which will always lead to slow growth at best, higher unemployment and increasing wealth inequality. Oh yeah, and won’t leave enough money to fund public services. Public services: I knew there was a Defence point in my rant somewhere.
Starmer will find unlimited money to prosucute brave Veterans .