The row over UK defence spending escalated sharply this week with the resignations of two defence ministers, exposing a widening gap between the government’s ambitious security pledges and the Treasury’s willingness to fund them.
Healey, who served as Defence Secretary, and Carns, the Armed Forces Minister, both quit arguing the government was not providing the resources necessary to meet the threats facing the country. In his resignation letter, Healey told Starmer he was being forced to accept a funding settlement that would reduce military readiness and increase risk to personnel on operations, according to the text of the letter reported by BBC News.
The resignations cap months of internal Whitehall conflict. Defence chiefs earlier this year warned ministers they needed an additional £28 billion over four years simply to meet existing commitments — a figure that, according to BBC diplomatic correspondent James Landale, “infuriated” No 10 and the Treasury. That number was reportedly reduced through negotiations first to £18 billion and then to approximately £13 billion. Healey resigned because he concluded that was insufficient.
Carns, in his resignation letter, said the armed forces are “still purchasing capability suitable for the last war while our adversaries arm for the next one,” according to the BBC report.
The UK currently spends about £66 billion annually on defence, supporting the armed forces, the nuclear deterrent, and commitments including the Aukus submarine partnership with the United States and Australia. Last year, the UK spent 2.3% of GDP on defence. The Labour government has promised to increase that to 2.5% by next year and, alongside other NATO allies, to 3.5% by 2035.
At the Munich security conference in February, Starmer said: “We are going to have to spend more faster.” Last week, the prime minister said publicly that UK intelligence believed “there could be an attack by Russia on Nato as soon as 2030.” One senior defence figure told the BBC that if that assessment was accurate, “we should be doubling spending.”
Justin Crump, CEO of the Sibylline risk intelligence firm, told Forces News: “The government is not prepared to put its money where its mouth has been.”
The delayed defence investment plan was supposed to deliver the funding to meet the shopping list set out in last year’s strategic defence review (SDR). In its absence, defence firms are struggling, with some contracts repeatedly put on hold and some companies going bust, according to the BBC. Each of the three armed services faces uncertainty over what weapons, equipment, and resources they will receive.
Decisions loom on a series of major procurement programmes: the full rollout of the army’s new AI digital targeting system; the long-delayed Ajax armoured fighting vehicle; the navy’s hybrid fleet of uncrewed ships and frigate renewal programme; the Royal Air Force’s order for sixth-generation fighter jets and potential cuts to F35 warplanes; and the restocking of missiles and munitions, much of which have been supplied to Ukraine.
Next week, new Defence Secretary Dan Jarvis will meet his NATO counterparts in Brussels. The allies will want to know how he plans to resolve the spending crisis, according to the BBC. Defence insiders say the UK is almost at the bottom of the NATO leaderboard for meeting its capability targets. In July, at a summit in Turkey, Starmer will face fellow NATO leaders — including Donald Trump — and will need to set out how much the UK is prepared to spend.