The chair of the Defence Committee has said the Prime Minister will arrive at this week’s NATO summit in Ankara empty-handed, telling the Commons that the government has not set out a clear path to spending 3 per cent of GDP on defence, let alone the 3.5 per cent NATO target.
Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, the Labour MP for Slough who chairs the committee, put the criticism directly to Defence Secretary Dan Jarvis at defence questions on Monday. “With the defence investment plan finally being published, I had hoped that as we head to the NATO summit in Ankara this week, the Government would have set out a clear path to 3.5 per cent, but unfortunately, the Prime Minister will be arriving empty-handed, because we have not even set out a clear path to 3 per cent,” he said.
Citing “the widely reported Russian potential plot to launch an attack on Polish soil, targeting its critical infrastructure,” and the US President’s warning that NATO members must increase investment or face the consequences, Dhesi asked whether the Prime Minister would reassure allies at Ankara by setting out a clear pathway to 3.5 per cent.
Jarvis did not offer one, pointing instead to the next spending review. “He will have heard my words the other day on the importance of ensuring that defence is the No. 1 spending priority at the next spending review. That is the moment at which we will need to set out a clear trajectory to honouring our commitment to spending 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2035,” the Defence Secretary said, adding that allies expect the UK to lead and to step up, “and that is what we will do.”
The exchange sharpens a question that has followed the Defence Investment Plan since its publication last week. The plan commits to defence spending of 2.7 per cent of GDP by 2029-30, rising to 4.2 per cent on NATO’s broader measure including wider security spending, with the government stating it will reach 3 per cent in the next parliament and 3.5 per cent by 2035, but the funding and profile for both are deferred to the next spending review, expected in 2027, at which the Treasury has committed that defence will be the number one priority.
This government is allergic to spending on the armed forces.
This government has committed to spending up to 5% on defence and preparing the nation for but not with the defence required, and they’ve been crystal clear on the matter
Maximum level of UK defence spending during WWII was approximately 54% of GDP. Current HMG will be unable to achieve more than a projected 2.68% through 2029, and an uncertain pathway to 3.5% of GDP by 2035. In the US, the WWII population is generally regarded as the “Greatest Generation,” presumably a similar appellation in the UK? Forefathers possessed a certain moral fiber. Current generation(s)?
My post was a little tongue in cheek – the UK Govt often procures systems ‘For, but not with’ weapons (e.g. ships with a big space where missile launchers can be added later) and also regularly says it is buying ‘up to’ a number of weapons rather than stating the number – the latest example of this is the plan to buy ‘up to 12’ SSNs but before that we have had ‘up to 6’ amphibious ships (turns out to be 4).
Is the UK spending enough? Probably not, but it is spending more finally and this extra money and the vast majority of planned programmes were secured in the DIP (GCAP, SSN-AUKUS, ISTARI, Ajax etc) along with a number of recommendations from the defence review implemented (building up munitions, fixing recruitment/retention, scaling production, fixing severe infra issues left unaddressed for years, autonomy/drones, digital targeting), plus the issue of paying for it has largely been addressed (£4.7bn back hole notwithstanding, but normally the black hole is much bigger)
What this Government is Allergic to is actually answering any questions by anyone in the House of Commons or having any debates on the subject. I watched the Defence Questions session and they wouldn’t give a straight answer to their own head of the select committee Mr Dhesi.
I actually have a lot of respect for Mr Dhesi he isn’t part of the, just stick to the established “record amounts spent” script, he asks questions and sometimes he even gets answers.
Most notably when the committee had Starmer in for a grilling and just wouldn’t let Starmer off with the usual answers and that’s when Starmer cracked and admitted that the DIP had been finished and sat in his desk since Xmas.