Labour is facing fresh questions over Britain’s defence spending after reports suggested Andy Burnham is preparing to postpone a major spending review, potentially delaying crucial decisions over how the Government intends to meet its promises to strengthen the Armed Forces.
The Prime Minister is reportedly poised to push the spending review back until later in 2027, when it could be held alongside the Budget, according to reports in The Times, subsequently reported by The Telegraph.
The potential delay matters because the review had been expected to provide much-needed detail on how Britain would increase defence expenditure to 3 per cent of GDP by 2030.
It was also expected to shed light on the Government’s longer-term commitment to reach NATO’s 3.5 per cent core defence spending target by 2035.
Yet months into Mr Burnham’s premiership, the Government has still not provided a detailed pathway explaining how those ambitions will be financed.
Now, instead of providing clarity, ministers face accusations of kicking one of the most important questions facing the country into the long grass.
The Treasury disputes suggestions that a spending review has been postponed, insisting that no date had formally been announced.
A spokesman said reports of a delay were “pure rumour and speculation”.
But that does little to answer the bigger question confronting Labour: when will the Government actually tell the country how it intends to pay for the military capability ministers themselves say Britain urgently needs?
The controversy is particularly striking because John Healey resigned as defence secretary in June after clashing with Sir Keir Starmer over the failure to commit to reaching 3 per cent of GDP by 2030.
Mr Healey, who subsequently became Chancellor, had argued that the increase was necessary in response to the growing threat from Russia and the possibility of an attack on a NATO member before the end of the decade.
Labour’s own Defence Secretary, Wes Streeting, has now acknowledged the urgency of the situation.
Speaking during a visit to Iceland, Mr Streeting said US President Donald Trump was “absolutely right” to demand greater defence spending from Britain and argued that the country must be ready to fight a war by 2030.
He defended Labour’s record, pointing out that defence spending stood at 2.3 per cent of GDP when the party entered government and is expected to reach 2.7 per cent next year.
But promising that Britain is heading in the right direction is not the same thing as producing a credible plan for reaching the destination.
The questions have become even more pressing ahead of the Chancellor’s Budget on October 28.
Mr Healey is already expected to have to find an additional £4.7 billion for the Defence Investment Plan, which The Telegraph reports was left only partially funded under his predecessor Rachel Reeves.
Meanwhile, Britain’s security environment is becoming more dangerous, not less.
The United States has withdrawn bomber aircraft from RAF Fairford following reports of a potential Iranian drone attack on the Gloucestershire base, while NATO has repeatedly warned of the growing Russian threat.
Against that backdrop, Mr Burnham made only a passing reference to defence during his Labour Party conference speech.
While Labour dithers over timetables and refuses to spell out where the money will come from, the Conservatives have moved to put defence firmly on the political agenda.
Kemi Badenoch has announced plans for an Israeli-style “Iron Dome” missile defence system for Britain, arguing that the country must begin preparing now for the threats it could face.
Responding to reports about the spending review, the Conservative leader said the Government was failing to explain what it intended to do on defence or how it would finance the necessary investment.
“We need to start getting ready now,” she said.
And that is surely the point.
Defence cannot be treated like another awkward Labour spending problem that can be pushed into next year’s in-tray.
If ministers genuinely believe Russia could threaten NATO by 2030, and if the Defence Secretary believes Britain must be war-fighting ready by the same date, then every year matters.
Aircraft, ships, missile defences, ammunition stockpiles, military infrastructure and trained personnel cannot simply be conjured into existence when the Treasury finally decides it is convenient to make a decision.
Britain needs to know what its defence strategy costs, where the money will come from and when it will be delivered.
“No Answer Andy” cannot keep promising outcomes while postponing the difficult decisions required to achieve them.
When it comes to defending the country, delay is not a strategy.
Image: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 55416505488_328bf37485_k
