The Ministry of Defence has admitted it does not centrally manage or track total spending on the UK’s Reserve Forces, after being pressed in Parliament to publish reserve expenditure figures for the last five years and projected spending for the remainder of this Parliament.
In a written parliamentary answer published on 13 February 2026, defence minister Louise Sandher-Jones said reserve spending “is not managed centrally, with each Service determining expenditure based on its specific operational requirements.”
The response was issued after Conservative MP Steve Barclay asked how much the MOD spent on reserves in each of the last five years, including categories beyond pay and bounty payments, and whether the department would set out expected spending for the remaining years of the current Parliament.
Sandher-Jones did not provide historical spending totals or a breakdown of reserve expenditure categories, instead pointing to wider defence budget commitments and the government’s longer-term ambition to expand the reserve force.
“The Government has committed to spending 2.6% of GDP on defence from 2027, and we have set the ambition to reach 3% in the next Parliament, subject to economic and fiscal conditions,” she said.
She added that the government will invest “over £270 billion in cash terms in defence” over the current Spending Review period, describing it as “the largest sustained increase in spending since the Cold War.” The minister also referenced the Strategic Defence Review’s stated ambition to increase the number of Active Reserves by 20% “when funding allows”, describing the aim as a way of enhancing surge capacity and demonstrating the UK’s readiness to defend itself.
However, the MOD said it could not provide a full picture of current reserve spending because the data is not held in one place. “Total spending on Reserve Forces between 2023-24 and 2024-25 is not managed centrally,” the minister said.
In response to Barclay’s request for projected spending figures, Sandher-Jones said the MOD does not routinely publish planned expenditure figures. “In relation to spending plans in 2025-26, we do not routinely place figures relating to planned expenditure in the public domain as they are subject to change,” she added.
The answer highlights the challenge of assessing whether reserve forces are being resourced in line with government ambitions, particularly as the MOD signals an intention to expand the reserve footprint while also restructuring elements of the Army and adjusting readiness priorities under the Strategic Defence Review. No timetable was provided for when funding conditions might allow the proposed 20% expansion of the Active Reserve.
Shameless OT post to start, but apologies anyway.
Regards previous Para Regiment Article on reducing parachute capability.
Post now on the Parachute Regiment’s own X feed denying the media reports.
It is stating that the speculation is incorrect, and that 2, 3, and 4 Para will continue to be “trained and in role” to rotate as the lead Battalion of the JATF.
Parachute capability remains unchanged and is led by 16 AA Brigade.
🤔
The government, and I use the term loosely, have no idea what they are doing with defence, or actaully anyhting else for that matter. They will probably decide they need another defence review next. 😴
A time honoured political tactic Geoff. ‘Leak’ a story about an outrageous cut being considered and then a few weeks later release the official announcement of the real smaller scope capability cut and claim it as a victory. There will be a cut somewhere in here….keep your eyes peeled.
You’re right of course, sadly. Apparently Reeves has a “surplus”, not in actual money, but with the ability to borrow. Due no doubt to taxing everyone to the hilt. Any bets there will be an announcement soon>
It’ll be a back and forth bumfight. The Para’s simply would never be capable of taking the removal of jumps lying down.
This istatement from the MOD about reserves is astonishing and wholly unacceptable.
We have 30,000 voluntary reserves on the payroll, a few hundred drill halls and stone frigates, a mass of vehicles, a heap of running costs and… the MOD can’t tell Parliament or public what it’s costing??? This is a remarkable admission by the MOD. In any other business, heads would roll for such a management failure.
It also shows a casual indifference about the reserves, which is all too obvious over the years.
It demonstrates a level of arrogance and belief in being above scrutiny by senior MOD civil servants and the buck stops with the Permanent Under Secretary. Healey and Pollock must demand that this information is extracted, provided promptly and updated annually.
How can the services go asking for another £28bn when they can’t even explain the detail of what they are spending it on?