The UK defence industrial base is struggling with unclear priorities, capability gaps and a lack of government direction, according to MPs and peers, who warn that delays to key funding plans are holding back both industry and national security objectives.
In its latest report, the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy says industry still does not have a clear signal on how defence spending will be allocated, with the long-promised Defence Investment Plan yet to be published.
Evidence to the committee suggests the UK retains strength in assembling final systems, but lacks depth in key components and supply chains. One contractor described a situation where “good capacity for assembly” exists, but “immediate component production capacity” is missing, pointing to structural weaknesses beneath the surface.
Those weaknesses are already being felt operationally. Former programme leads highlighted how difficult it has been to source critical inputs such as propulsion systems, motors and computing hardware from sovereign or secure supply chains, particularly in fast-moving areas like uncrewed systems.
Despite repeated commitments to “rebuild” the defence industrial base, industry groups say the absence of the Defence Investment Plan means firms still do not know where to invest. Without clarity on funding allocations, companies are unable to align research and development with government priorities, especially in areas linked to sovereign capability.
That uncertainty is particularly acute for smaller firms. SMEs are seen as central to innovation, yet the report suggests they face structural barriers to scaling up, leaving them exposed to foreign acquisition. One witness noted that while the UK is effective at creating start-ups, companies often struggle to grow beyond that stage, limiting their contribution to defence capability.
Industry bodies including ADS and techUK warned that this lack of direction is already affecting investment decisions. There are also concerns about how much of the burden for resilience spending will fall on private companies, with tensions emerging between commercial viability and national security requirements.
Ministers have acknowledged delays. The Government says it is “working flat out” to complete the Defence Investment Plan, although it has also indicated it will not rush publication. Officials argue the delay reflects a wider effort to reassess spending and ensure the UK is prepared for higher readiness demands.
The committee, however, is clear in its conclusion. It says industry “lacks an adequate signal” from government, and that this is undermining efforts to prioritise critical technologies and build long-term capability. For SMEs in particular, the absence of support risks weakening the UK’s ability to retain homegrown expertise.
Healey has now lost all credibility as Sec of State with the continued delay in the DIP and given we are de facto at war with Iran despite what Starmer says as UK sovereign territory has been hit and our forces in the Middle East are under threat every day.
Time to rid ourselves of the non leader who is our PM too.
Why the Service Chiefs do not do a mass resignation is beyond me as they know the parlous state of our military and the absolute lack of capability to protect the home base from ballistic missile attack. Answers please from other readers?
The service chiefs like their cushy roles and benefits that come with them. Hence why they’re sticking around.
Healey was a plane crash before he said we had more ships in the fleet than we did and quite honestly, how he’s not been sacked or tended his resignation over that basic failure, with his inability to speak other than party rhetoric,
Binning the PM is certainly a route, but honestly, he just needs less Civil Servant and Less Lawyer input…
I don’t think changing PM or government alone will solve the defence crisis.
The MOD badly needs reform.
MOD lacks the ability to accurately cost and manage timelines on big projects.
In other words, the MOD consistently fails to deliver on its promises.
This creates mistrust with the treasury, who, in turn continue to block funding.
MOD is constantly reforming. It badly needs to stop reforming and make the system work. Almost any system would be a better starting point than constant upheaval. And if it does reform, that should be worked out while the current system continues to run, rather than constant partial implementation. Otherwise we get an administration capability gap in the same way as we have military capability gaps. The UK’s Defence administration is running at half of a very slow speed while it waits for the latest operating models to be handed down from above. It’s impossible to find the right person in MOD to talk to while departments split, shift, and merge.
First the government decided on splitting MOD into 4 areas, aka the Quad. The Quad spent a year trying to figure out what it was supposed to do. Then the four stars appointed 3 stars and the 3 stars got their 2 stars, and not just the people in charge, but their reporting areas. As reform slowly roles downward towards the people who do the work, the essentials are mired in two kinds of lethargy: the old rules and waiting on the new expectations. It’s not just the DIP. Reform is also delayed as the complicated interleaving elements wait on each other. Let’s face it, budget shortages create yet another set of speed problems, but that’s par for the course.
I have to hope that eventually when the music stops and two to three years of pointless delays are over, no fool will again sound the battle cry: the MOD needs reform!
“The Quad spent a year trying to figure out what it was supposed to do…..”
I rest my case: This is ineffective management/procrastination, which requires change.
If the MOD was a private company, it would have gone out of business, it clearly lacks project/people management skills
The Strategic Defence Review transformation to whole of government meaning Foreign Office, Treasury and MoD aligned to the expectation, cost and effort is harder than some expected since people don’t like changing even when repetition hoping for different results is the definition of stupid.
Transformation costs time and political capital so failing to provide those costs ensures that it can’t succeed. Making the case for change is paramount and I very much doubt that the civil service has the required skills and experience to transform across three ministries at the same time.
Their pensions? And that they are yes men chosen and then gagged by the MoD to keep quiet, and even avoid answering questions from the HoCDSC.
A tale as old as time… Will this Government fund the Defence of this country and will they actually look at why we spend £60+ Billion and yet the French have a much higher deplorability, for example, without their Politicians being embarrassed into taking action… But rather responding to where the British “Left their protectorate” high and dry.
It’s not in labours DNA defence labours DNA is LGBTQ / homes for illegal immigrants . A labour green coalition would Imo scrap defence and borders . Open borders and no defence would be the lefty dream ticket.
What a surprise. No leadership? WOW 🙃
I agree with most of what’s said above. The government appears to lack the ability to make hard choices and act decisively. As Nelson said “Bold measures are the safest”
Starmer is a lawyer. So will he always take the safe, middle ground after weighing up issues rather than the decisive kick up the arse action needed on so many areas?
And he U turns when his backbenches complain, be it on firmer immigration controls, welfare reform, and such.
So, on we go, no change, no real action but words.
I think lack of direction is now a whole of the UK problem, the politics of picket lines, marches and protest has been found to be not the way to run a country, place is falling apart. While those dull people n charge day dream the days away by doing not a lot. iIs as if no one whats stick their head up and say lets do this, just in case its takes money from Welfare or up sets the hard left,
Most disfunctional goverment in 60 years.
Let’s be honest Doris had a big majority but he didn’t do welfare reform either and he spent left right and centre on the pandemic most of it wasted and now a crushing burden on British SMEs.
SMEs were suffering under Sunak but under Reeves a lot have given up. It is one of the reasons the economy is flat lining.
Reason the cost make any thing, emply any one is too high. Thats why unemployment and benefit claims are up by other 1 million. You can not tax the working until they are skint to pay for rest to do nothing. I do not know any company taking any one on. The war in Iran will be used as cover for mess things are in the old its was going great but then, its not our fault.
I see no way out of the mess every thing here cost too much and money is tight. A hand out from the IMF is not as far fetched as some think in a year or so.
Anything to continue with tax cuts for the well off! If we cannot ‘afford’ defence, NHS, education, etc, then what are these scroungers going to spend their money on and who do they expect to feed them?
The Defence Investment Plan will be a paper tiger unless net zero is ditched:
‘The scale of today’s energy transition requires approximately 700 exajoules of new non-carbon energies by 2050, which needs about 38,000 projects the size of BC’s Site C or 39,000 equivalents of Muskrat Falls.
Converting energy-intensive processes (e.g., iron smelting, cement, and plastics) to non-fossil alternatives requires solutions not yet available for large-scale use.
The energy transition imposes unprecedented demands for minerals including copper and lithium, which require substantial time to locate and develop mines.
To achieve net-zero carbon, affluent countries will incur costs of at least 20 percent of their annual GDP.
While global cooperation is essential to achieve decarbonization by 2050, major emitters such as the United States, China, and Russia have conflicting interests.
To eliminate carbon emissions by 2050, governments face unprecedented technical, economic and political challenges making rapid and inexpensive transition impossible.’
Vaclav Smil 2024
The Strategic Defence Review transformation to whole of government meaning Foreign Office, Treasury and MoD aligned to the expectation, cost and effort is harder than some expected since people don’t like changing even when repetition hoping for different results is the definition of stupid.
So Rachel can’t get her fiscal headroom in order with the national interest because party members have other ideas. So DIP can’t pass the funding stage.
The Peace Dividend delusion is over and we are not safe.
Time to pay the insurance premium for freedom or learn ruzzian
The Peace Dividend delusion has allowed politicians to safeguard their electoral prospects by shifting Defence spending to social provision and even war in Europe hasn’t enabled them to pivot back to Defence.
We bailed out the bankers in 2008 and now its their turn to invest in Defence since their business depends on peace and stability. Lower risk means lower cost for Defence Investment Bonds than standard Gilts.
Thus the 3.5% GDP Defence spending target for 2030, and 2.75% GDP for 2026 are affordable without tax increases. A long term investment plan for national security.
A requirement for a banking licence. Ethical investment means defending people that you expect to profit from.
Over to Finance Ministers to make it happen. Banks must do their Duty or face Windfall Taxes.
Let me give you people the DIP report : The MOD must cut defence spending by £10 billion. If Russia attacks we will wave a white flag. And as far as that woeful front bench are concerned it will stop those racists waving the Union flag. Job done.
I remember Labour cancelling the T.S.R.2 having been persuaded to buy F-111s by America.
However they cut back on the program and the RAF ended up with Phantoms. Also ran the Vulcans and Lightnings longer till the Tornadoes became available.
Defence decisions can take 20 years to put right.
It will take an oil war , another possible war over suez canal , a war in europe before this govt realises the UK is in danger .
Neville Chamberlain oversaw the largest peacetime increase in British defence spending, rising from 2.2% to 6.9% of GDP between 1933 and 1938. As Chancellor and Prime Minister, he heavily prioritized the RAF, increasing its budget from £16.78 million in 1933 to over £105 million by 1939, aimed at deterring German air power. Now Neville is the kind of guy this nation desperately needs today .