More money for defence unlikely, Starmer suggests - as Healey warns Britain’s enemies ‘do not follow Treasury’s timetable’
The PM said he had already “taken the decision” to cut capital spending from other departments to pay for increases.
Additional funding for defence is unlikely, Sir Keir Starmer has indicated - as his former defence secretary John Healey warned Britain’s adversaries “do not follow timetables set by the Treasury.”
Listen to this article
Speaking with fellow G7 leaders at a summit in France, the prime minister said he had already “taken the decision” to slash capital spending by 1% from other departments to pay for further increases.
He said it is up to the new defence secretary, Dan Jarvis, to decide “where he wants that money to be spent”.
It comes after John Healey resigned as defence secretary and Al Carns as armed forces minister last week amid a row over funding for Britain's Defence Investment Plan (Dip).
But the Prime Minister insisted that the Dip would give the UK “capability for the future” as he defended his record, adding that his Government was increasing the defence budget from 2.3% of GDP to 2.6%.
“Obviously the new Defence Secretary is reading in and we’re talking to him about how and what we will spend that money on, in terms of capability, and he’s got his own thoughts now on what the priorities should be, and so that’s the discussion we’re in the middle of at the moment,” he said.
Read more: Dan Jarvis appointed new defence secretary after bombshell Healey resignation
Read more: MoD in revolt: Healey and Carns quit over Starmer's military spending plan as PM faces new crisis
But Mr Healey has slammed a proposal from the Treasury that he said would have increased defence spending to 2.68% of GDP in 2030, warning a greater increase is needed.
Speaking in the Commons on Tuesday for the first time since his resignation, he again urged Sir Keir to ramp up defence spending, telling MPs: “Our adversaries do not follow timetables set by the Treasury.”
Arguing that he believed his resignation would come to be seen as “necessary in securing the future of our armed forces and our alliances”, he said Britain must not “fall behind” as Nato allies increased spending.
And he urged ministers to look beyond reallocating funding from other departments to pay for defence.
He said: “I appreciate how hard this is for Cabinet colleagues and I am very grateful to those who support what is required, but not all needs to be done by cutbacks elsewhere.
“There are credible ways of meeting the mid-term funding challenges, working multinationally and, as other nations in Europe are doing, that could allow us to protect the ability to deliver our Labour missions across government.”
Mr Healey’s resignation speech was followed by an address from Mr Carns, sitting on the same bench as his former boss at the Ministry of Defence.
The former Royal Marines officer repeated his own criticisms of the Government’s approach to defence, saying its plans were neither adequately funded nor preparing for the wars Britain is likely to fight.
He said: “The reality is we are spending too much time preparing for last year’s war, not tomorrow’s.”
Critics have argued that the funding row exposes a deeper problem inside defence: that ministers are promising a larger and more capable military while the armed forces are still struggling with basic readiness, ageing equipment, recruitment problems and pressure on day-to-day training budgets.
The Government has insisted it is increasing defence spending and delivering the deepest reforms to the Ministry of Defence in decades.
Speaking to the Lords International Relations and Defence Committee, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton said he was most worried about the funding used to pay for operational activity, exercises and training.
He said: “The thing that I’m most concerned about is the level of day-to-day activity funding, the resource departmental expenditure limit, because that funds operational activity and drives exercises and training.“Those are the things that make sure the men and women of our armed forces are as ready as they can be with the equipment that they have got today, and without changes to the settlement, as John Healey set out, then those areas will come under pressure.”
Sir Richard added: “We will have to dial back our activities and our exercise and operational activity if the level of resource funding that’s available to us does not increase. Now that’s still to be debated and decided.”