On his upcoming visit to Washington DC on 19 September, Labour’s Shadow Defence Secretary, John Healey, is expected to underscore the necessity for the UK and US to jointly brace their democratic resilience in anticipation of pivotal elections next year.
His speech at the American Enterprise Institute, alongside Democratic Congressman Dean Phillips, will advocate for a bolstered transatlantic alliance in the realm of defence and security.
Healey will say, “For Labour, the US is the UK’s most essential ally, especially on defence and security. Our countries should be on high alert ahead of the UK General Election and US Presidential Election in 2024. This is the time to launch democratic resilience work together to better protect our democratic values and systems.”
Within the framework of a recent paper he penned with the Royal United Services Institute, Healey will propose the inception of a new Democratic Resilience Centre. Designed to shield democratic values, political institutions, and open societies, the Centre will aim to “not only collectively monitor threats and share best practices, but also advise on action and develop new strategies, including military operational responses, to counter them.”
Speaking on the prospective Centre, Healey will emphasise, “Democracy and freedom is hardwired into NATO’s founding treaties, alongside collective defence. Our deep conviction in democracy means we must also act to defend our democracies when under attack. This proposed Democratic Resilience Centre would protect our democratic values, political institutions, elections, and open societies, not only by monitoring threats, but also by advising on action and military operational responses to counter them.”
Drawing attention to the global geopolitical scenario, particularly in relation to Ukraine, Healey will commend the US leadership’s role during the Ukraine conflict, stating that “there may be a change to Labour next year, but there will be no change to Britain’s resolve to stand with Ukraine, confront Russian aggression and pursue Putin for his war crimes.”
In the midst of these high-level dialogues, Healey will be accompanied by Labour’s Foreign Secretary, David Lammy. Their itinerary includes interactions with members of the US Congress and engagements with officials from the White House, the US Department of Defence, and the US Department of State.
Did a bunch of Labour Party Staffers, frustrated at what they should advise Healey to speak about during his forthcoming speech to the AEI, leave the office in frustration, retire to a local pub, get snockered, and around 0100 come up with the idea of a “Democratic Resilience Centre; and much to their bewilderment convinced Healy to agree to it the next morning? And to add icing on the cake present the idea alongside Democrat US Rep Dean Phillips, a notorious Trump hater, who just released his own Presidential trial balloon only to have it shot down before it even… Read more »
“…Within the framework of a recent paper he penned with the Royal United Services Institute, Healey…”
Calm down dear.
Try not to get so aerated, you don’t have a candidate Labour MP who is happy to write with sophistry; now, there’s a dilemma for a Labour person.
Tho, is a problem solved because I’ll be voting in a different constituency.
So you made this all up on your own , creative writing really is your thing. Love the notorious Trump hater part, when every one knows that Trump is the Jimmy Carter of the republicans Phillips who Ive never heard of before is actually a wealthy business man from Minnesota who flipped a republican leaning district and is a ‘moderate’ by US standards as for Biden , this was his own words I think President Biden is a remarkable man, a man who saved our country, certainly the best man for the job in the last four years, a man… Read more »
Ignorance is bliss, they say. My but you must be blissful. Try following the US news before bloviating.
Will Dean Phillips survive his presidential trial balloon? – Roll Call
Starmer and Healey are making all the right noises on defence. These are some of their recent comments Starmer has criticised the prime minister for “breaking a promise” not to cut British Army troops. During Prime Minister’s Questions, the Labour leader quoted Boris Johnson from the 2019 election campaign, where he pledged to maintain the Army’s size. Starmer said this week’s defence review would now see numbers fall by 10,000 as part of government plans.” BBC 23 March 2021 “Labour’s support for nuclear deterrence is non-negotiable” “Ukraine-Russia: Sir Keir Starmer calls for Parliament to ‘look again’ at defence spending and… Read more »
👍
Except David, the minor problem that every Labour government since the war has cut defence spending dramatically. Please also bear in mind that a very short time ago Starmer and Rayner and Healey were supporters of Jeremy Corbyn. He wasn’t even in favour of NATO.
Not true, I’m afraid, at least of the last Labour administration.
Blair inherited a defence spend of 2.5% of GDP. Eleven years later, under Brown, it was still 2.5% of GDP.
And that was a real figure, not the pretendy one that the Conservative Governments bandy about, which includes all the dodgy bits that Osborne crammed in from other departments, like pensions and the core nuclear programme.
I was really talking about actual cuts and delays in defence programmes but if you want to bring in percentages I think you’ll find that the figures are almost identical.
‘I think you’ll find that the figures are almost identical.’ Sorry Geoff, don’t quite follow this bit, identical to what? Labour always gets a bashing from the Conservatives on defence but I don’t think fairly. The Blair government chopped Jaguars and Harriers and so on, but that has to be placed in the context that, while the defence budget had been near-on halved by the eager Conservatives, the nanning levels and equipments had not. The poisoned chalice of cuts was intentionally left for Labour to sort out. They did so, stabilised defence spending, retained an army of 105,000 (Phase 2… Read more »
“didn’t slash, burn, sell off and privatise, “
As an example, DERA sold off would counter that comment.
And when the escort force went from 35 to 23, SSN from 12 to 7, and Fast Jet Sqns from over 20 ) I lose count ,at least 23 ) to just 12, then I must disagree with you on slashing and burning.
But yes, manpower was kept, and that is important. With operations in Helmand and Iraq that is the only reason as far as I’m concerned.
They are all as bad in my book until shown to be otherwise.
In my area we have the joy of an up-coming bi-election. On the door step labour are quite open about a future Britain with a small defence force and without nuclear weapons. There was not much talk of Kier. The activists seem more Corbyn than a new Labour (and electable) Blair. Next year people are going to need to decide between the conservatives with all their faults and left wing Labour as in 2019 regardless of what is in the manifesto.
I can only suggest that you do what I’ve done my friend. Go back in the books or online and check what went under Blair/ Brown and what happened under Cameron’s coalition with the Liberals.
Cripes wrote: “”Not true, I’m afraid, at least of the last Labour administration. Blair inherited a defence spend of 2.5% of GDP. Eleven years later, under Brown, it was still 2.5% of GDP.”” Whilst on paper we can claim the above, when looked under the microscope we find a much different story. In 1997 the defence budget was 2.56% of GDP, that saw a gradual fall followed by slight rises after the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and only went above the 1997 figure in 2009 (2.64%) and 2010 (2.57%) 1998:2.50% 1999:2.42% 2000:2.37% 2001:2.41% 2002:2.49% 2003:2.55% 2004:2.50% 2005:2.43% 2006:2.36%… Read more »
Fair points Farouk. I have never been clear about the funding for the sand wars. HMG did r,ather grudgingly, shell out for UORs on about 2,000 protected patrol vehicles, but the army was short-changed by the Treasury and had to carry a lot of the extra costs without additional funding. The figures though do stand up, Blair inherited around 2.5% of GDP and Brown left it at around 2.5% of GDP. This despite the global crash of 2007-9,(?), when all departments had to do some rapid belt-tightening. And they retained an army establishment of 105,000, which has subsequently been slashed… Read more »
Every Conservative government since Cameron’s appalling 2010 SDSR has inflicted defence cuts. May and Johnson were no different. Osborne lumbered the defence budget with the costs of the nuclear deterrent when it used to be funded by the Treasury. May included MoD and military pensions in the 2%. Non-contributory, index linked, final salary pensions at that. Sunak is desperate to fund a 2% income tax cut as a sweetener before he will have to call the next election in Jan 2025. Watch him force Shapps to claw back a big chunk of the £24 billion Wallace got for defence to… Read more »
There are no conservatives in UK. What did they conserve?
They are slow progressives, Labour are fast progressives.
In the end most of you all will get what you will deserve.
A country where merit do not matter, but race,sex whatever neo marxist class is created , where words have no meaning except for those that have the power say their meaning at certain times and place and by whom. Children will denounce their parents and every human relation is a political relation.
Welcome to 1984 this is what you will get.
Correct
And I would like a pint of whatever you’ve been drinking please.
Don’t you mean China and Russia and their mates Iran and North Korea.
You been boozin Alex 😄
Starmer does not have an enemy in the world and none of his friends like him.
The entire Labour Party nationally wants the return of Corbyn. Guess what Corbyn’s opinion of the U.S. is and, also, what sort of defence policy he would bring forward.
I should weigh the sum of the parts not piecemeal through fanaticism
I really seriously wonder about our politicians sometimes….no make that all the time..they have the intellect of a potato and the attention span of a goldfish. How could we have gone from titans like Thatcher to morons like this fellow Healey in the span of 33 years? Just reading the news these days feels like it is dumbed down for the masses as well. The cult of celebrity and sound bites rules supreme and considered debate is a long forgotten concept to our elites.
Thatcher and her successor Major managed to destroy the industrial base of the UK so thoroughly that we have never had a balance of payments surplus since. The national debt in 1985 was roughly 40% of GDP, today it has risen to 104%, about £2.2 TRILLION. With interest rates at 5.25% and about to rise again this month to 5.50%, the interest payments on our debt are £85 billion a year – we only spend about £50 billion a year on defence. Since 2010 conservative policies of tax, borrow and spend have ruined our economy; Sunak printed more money than… Read more »
The industrial base of this country was destroyed by incompetent management and militant left wing unions. Unless you were in your twenties in the 1970’s David you know very little of what went on before Thatcher took over. Inflation at 28 per cent; interest rates at fifteen per cent ; Unemployment in the millions; rats in the streets because councils were on strike; human bodies stored in refrigerated vans because the morgues were out on the picket lines. Left wing Labour managed that all by themselves. No Covid, no Ukrainian war, no embargoes on oil supplies, no WORLDWIDE inflation, all… Read more »
Hi Geoff. I like much of what you post here and I hope you won’t mind if I differ on the economic performance of Thatcher’s government, particularly her Chancellor Dominic Lawson Lawson was arguably the Tory Chancellor who, responding to Thatcher’s monetarist dogma, set the financial conditions for the near total destruction of the Britsh industrial base, the end of balance of payments surpluses and the selling off to foreigners of highly profitable state industries employing millions of skilled workers. Lawson’s decision to “shadow” the deutschmark ensured interest rates were cut in the spring of 1988 – at a time… Read more »
The reality is the rot set in far earlier than this. Opportunities to modernise industrial practices weren’t taken in the late 1950’s and the Westminster political football had just been passed between the Tories and Labour ever since…. So far so bad… Mrs Thatcher had to get to grips with creaking ineffectiveness in our heavy industries, it had to be done and in reality, both the Heath and Callahan administrations also knew this and had both made ‘some moves’ in this direction. The failure of Thatcherism is the promised trickle down economic model only partially worked, with large previously industrial… Read more »
Trickle down economics has never worked. Research papers have studied across the globe and it’s never worked as intended.
It never has unfortunately…..
Since Thatcher & Reagan it’s been more like hoovering up wealth fo the rich & squirrelling it away offshore. Austerity was a tool & excuse to hammer employment rights & drive down wages while the rich laughed all the way to the bank. This is unsustainable, dishonest, cruel & evil.
The decent & principled seem to be diven out of politics for sociopathic freaks.
I voted for Brexit, mainly because I was swayed by the sovereignty issue. I did not vote for the “hard Brexit” lobbied for by Richard Tice, Nigel Farage and negotiated by Johnson, Govey and his Lordship, which has seriously damaged foreign inward investment and caused the loss of most of our exports to the EU.
In marginal seats the Reform party may take enough votes from the Conservatives to let the Labour or Liberal Democrat candidates in, particularly if their constituencies vote tactically
Quite possibly, Reform might also take a good few of the old Red wall seats too David. I don’t think it will do the Tories any harm to be benched for 5 years and properly pivot back to traditional center right values of low tax and small state. I think a Labour government will unfortunately end in more Strikes, as the Unions make demands that Labour can’t pay out on…. Starmer has a team that’s actually weaker than Sunaks and that’s saying something…. It’s a centrist, high spending invasive middle of the road government under Sunak, or more the same… Read more »
Its sad to say but Labour are ahead because the tories are so apaulling. Thats really sad situation for the UK public.
I’m sorry David but I have to disagree with you on a couple of fundamental issues. Lawson didn’t destroy anything. The bulk of British industry in the sixties and seventies were basket cases that had already been run into the ground. Lawson did not sell them off to foreigners. Of the shares available 96 per cent of their own employees invested in buying shares. Neither did he or Thatcher favour the rich. When they came to power the basic rate of tax was 33% and the higher rate 83%. This was reduced to a basic rate of 25% and then… Read more »
I would have described the industrial unrest of the 60s and 70s as a cultural clash between a union movement that wanted to be involved in long term planning and an anglo-american business culture that wanted them to stick to a very limited reactive role. The Labour governments of the 60s and 70s tried to negotiate some compromises, that were shot down by both sides. Heath tried to crush the unions before North Sea oil came in and with the Oil crisis of the early 70s crashed the economy. Then Thatcher settled it by using North Sea oil revenue to… Read more »
I’m assuming this is some kind of early April Fools Day? I was a teenager in the middle sixties and in my twenties through the seventies. I’m sorry but either you’re too young or have a very bad memory. The unions didn’t seek compromise on anything. They just wanted power. Bear in mind that most of this occurred during Labour being in power most of the time. The oil crisis had nothing to do with Heath. It was down to OPEC. The people who took advantage of it were the thugs in the NUM. As for industry the problem was… Read more »
For once. I agree with you Geoff. 👍
Let’s go for the double.😉
😄 👍
No. Firstly UK is 8th in the world in manufacturing and we produce more by value per head than China. We just don’t make things like garden forks any more (thankfully). Secondly, British people decided that UK manufactured goods weren’t as good a foreign goods. In the late 70s you could choose an Austin Allegro or a VW Golf, fairly obvious which way that would go. Choice and a free market took its toll on British manufacturing. Nothing to do with politics, British people would have bought the VW even with Labour in power. Agree Sunak printed more than any… Read more »
Why pick on Healey… did you not notice the Defence Secretary and his …. Im looking for his obvious qualities for the job
Admit it hes a party apparatchik of the worst kind
He was very good at selling photocopiers and setting up pyramid selling organisations…I’m sure they are useful.
Perhaps he can copy some more equipment. I’m surprised he hasn’t got some inflatable decoys to put on display as kit bought.
The Argentine airforce was completely destroyed as a credible force between 2000 and 2020, when British exporters were strong-armed into holding back vital aircraft components whenever the Argentines wanted to buy new jets… turns out our components are in alot of things. Thus Argentina is still using Skyhawks.
When we want to pursue a national policy over 40 years to advance British power, sometimes we are VERY good at doing so
Also the lack of funds and a government actually wanting to fund defence played a part. It’s all good as it’s kept the islands safe.
The U.K. does still make lots of stuff and are these things that have stopped aircraft being sold.
If Argentina stopped claiming the islands the relationship could improve.
Argentina could be up for one of the biggest ever political and economic experiments ever if Milei wins.
Actually it’s important to look at how our democracy can be protected in the 21century..when your enemies have the ability to spread misinformation at a national level you really need to understand what that means for democracy..not thinking about it will lead to our democracy being subverted by the likes of china..who have no issue with buying anyone or using any and means to take forward their goals….including smearing any politician they don’t like in this county or supporting a more friendly politician.
Like many contentious issues it’s a debate that needs to be had.
No it is not a debate that needs to be had, since Liberty allows Communist Manifesto for example.
Your veiled discussion intent is that you want support for censorship and limitation of civil rights for people you disagree with.
Tell me spread of misinformation included the Communist Manifesto?
Hate speech includes the hate against bourgeoise, rich? Or the polluters? “negationists”?
No not at all, as I have not come down on one side or other around, I’ve said we need to have the discussion and debate. personally I think it’s destructive to sensor…but my issue is with: 1) funding of political parties and politically active groups by foreign powers ( the USSR funded CND in the 1970s and 1980s). 2) the use of the Ecco chamber and the way AI in social media sculpts what information people get. We do need to agree how these are managed…my view is you don’t allow external funding of pressure groups and political groups… Read more »
It is well know that Free Speech implies that people that are against Free Speech have a voice. Likewise that Democratic countries have parties against Democracy, hence Communist parties have been allowed all over Western World.
Indeed, but only to a degree…but we alway place limits…and those limited are generally based around how threatened a nation feels… 1) in the UK a good example is the terrorism act 2000…the prescribed list of terrorist organisations is classic and more and more used…it started off with just over 20..there are now 78 proscribed groups in the UK its illegal to support or promote any material from them etc etc. 2j I’m old enough to remember when Sinn Fein and 10 other republican and loyalist groups were band from speaking between 1988 and 1994…there were many other examples during… Read more »
It was really ‘New Labour’ that first successfully ran with the idea of ‘spin is all, substance is irrelevant- smile for the cameras’ as an election-winning strategy. Before that our politicians were expected to be freakish creatures with limited social skills who were judged on their actual technical ability (albeit that was always variable).
You did get the bit where she said she would not campaign off the Falklands victory and promptly allowed Flags of the Union to be waved in party politicals
Underline is English, underscore is American English.
David Lammy….shadow foreign secretary now there is a man with a titanic intellect (tongue firmly in cheek)…god help us…then you look at the comservative benches…PM Sunak….a technocrat managing decline…again the intellect of a gnat….really god help the UK…
Lammy does have a masters in law from Harvard university and came from a poor, single mother London inner-city family. So I would say intellect wise he is well above average…you may not agree with his politics and beliefs, but that is different. Sunak was from a middle class family and had a private education…so all the advantages… but they don’t give away MBAs from Stanford university for being an average intellect….I don’t agree with his political views, but I’m dam well sure he’s more able to understand the economy and how it’s working that you or me.. ( unless… Read more »
I worked with David Lammy for several years before he went into full time politics. He was a bright, hard working and very likeable young lawyer – and, unlike many in politics, totally honest.
We all know on ukdj no matter who’s in government next won’t make any difference to our defence budget there’s just no will for it .IF anything it could get worse 😕
That’s something we can all unfortunately agree with Andrew….
Having to rely on a decision making process that is completely out of reach is « strange ». USA made an independance war in order to be able to make theire own decisions. UK is placed in a trap. It don’t control US votes, decision and frustrations. It don’t have a say over what will be decided. In order to make sense, UK should be the 52nd state to have a say in this election. Otherways, I don’t understand the usefulness of being spectator of what is happening.
Interesting concept. It gives Healey an agenda to justify his trip I suppose. But he’s right…it did all go pear shaped with the printing press 🙂
Haha,
Hilarious the parties that are at forefront of censorship , social cancelation , low level political violence, separating persons by classes, even the main leader said that you don’t belong to a race if you don’t vote for him are talking about “democracy” and the owner of this blog posts that…!?
At least no one talked about Liberty.
‘Democratic resllience’? Remind me, what was Labour’s position when voter ID was introduced? Maybe democratic resilience only matters when they think they’ll be the ones to gain.
“will advocate for a bolstered transatlantic alliance in the realm of defence and security”
Is this like when Trump won and the Labour party blanked him. Not that I support Trump but he was an elected leader.
So should this read ‘will advocate for a bolstered transatlantic alliance in the realm of defence and security as long as some one we like is elected’
Starmer and his team are just showboating; positioning themselves as leaders in waiting. He is playing the same ‘defence and security’ card with the agenda in Paris with Macron.
Macron is an irrelevance- he is the most hated French President in a long long time with approval ratings of <35%- there is no way he is getting voted back in as President again in 2024.
Elections both sides of the Channel in 2024. I see King Charles is with Macron in France this week.A new entente cordiale? Maybe post Brexit we will see Churchill’s ambition of France and the UK as one nation becoming a reality 🙂
Isn’t it a crime to suggest that election integrity is less than perfect when Republicans do it?
Oh my god, how self-absorbed is the UK? Do you think anyone in the US gives a rat’s ass about what the shadow? Whatever the hell that means person thinks.? Absolutely no one in North America cares….
Your comments have been going directly to the bin for months, Esteban, no one is reading them.