Skip to main content
On Air Now
Listen Now

3pm to 6pm

Listen Now

3pm to 7pm

Badenoch accuses Starmer of leaving defence spending 'mess to his successor' amid £5billion black hole

The Tory leader accused the PM of "leaving this mess to his successor" as the pair clashed in the Commons on Wednesday

Share

By Danielle de Wolfe

Kemi Badenoch launched a scathing attack on Sir Keir Starmer during Wednesday's Prime Minister's Questions over his defence spending shortfall, accusing him of leaving a "mess" following his resignation.

Listen to this article

Loading audio...

Targeting the Prime Minister over his spending decisions following the release of the long-awaited Defence Investment Plan (DIP), the Tory leader said the minimum levels of funding were a decision "any PM would have made”.

Accusing the PM of "leaving this mess to his successor" after announcing he was stepping down as leader last week, Badenoch said his "limited plan" for defence investment has "completely unravelled because he hasn't found the money to pay for it".

It comes after details of the plan revealed a £5bn shortfall, after the government pledged a further £15bn towards defence spending on Tuesday, an attempt to meet Nato's target of a 5% Defence Spending target by 2035.

Outlining pushback from military chiefs, Badenoch went on to insist the head of the UK armed forces "made it known" that the military needed a minimum of £28bn to defend the country.

Read more: Starmer’s defence investment plan revealed - as helicopters scrapped amid MoD cuts and Healey insists ‘more needs to be done’

Read more: Every new AI military drone creates a target for enemy hackers, cyber expert warns

Pushing the PM on the numbers, she asked Starmer to explain why he believes "half that amount" is considered an acceptable level of funding.

Starmer was seen to retort: "That is what is needed to keep our country safe".

He went on to hit back at the Tories, accusing them of cutting "defence spending when they came into power".

"Let's drop the faux outrage and focus on what matters," Starmer insisted.

The Defence Secretary has said he is confident Andy Burnham will give Britain’s defence the investment it needs despite leaving the next prime minister a £4.7 billion funding gap.

Dan Jarvis told reporters on a visit to missile manufacturer Cambridge Aerospace on Wednesday that he had the “assurance that, as prime minister, Andy Burnham will make sure that we’ve got the investment coming into defence”.

But Mr Jarvis acknowledged there would have to be “conversations” with the man expected to take over from Sir Keir Starmer in less than three weeks, vowing he would “fight hard for defence”.

The long-delayed defence investment plan (Dip) was published on Tuesday.
The long-delayed defence investment plan (Dip) was published on Tuesday. Picture: Alamy

The £15bn uplift primarily comes from notable cuts to other MoD departments - a move that has been met with unease by many military chiefs.

But the Treasury has yet to spell out how it will fund almost a third of the increase, leaving £4.7 billion of funding to be set out at the next budget.

That decision leaves Mr Burnham with a potential headache for his first budget as he faces a choice between higher taxes, more borrowing or further spending cuts in order to plug the gap.

Mr Jarvis defended the decision to put off some of the funding decisions until the budget, saying it was “not unreasonable” that “those kind of commitments are made in the context of a major fiscal event”.

But asked where the extra money would come from, he said this was up to the Treasury, adding: “My job is about securing more money for defence.”

Earlier, defence minister Luke Pollard suggested Mr Burnham had only found out about the £4.7 billion gap when the Treasury figures were published on Tuesday.

Mr Pollard previously said: “Downing Street have a close dialogue with Andy’s team… I understand they’ve been keeping him close to the process, and told him yesterday when the Treasury published the statement and the breakdown of the financial costs.”