Keir Starmer was accused of ducking the issue of national security after refusing, yet again, to set out a clear timeline for lifting defence spending to 3 per cent, as MPs warned Britain risks being caught unprepared in an increasingly dangerous world.
Appearing before the Commons liaison committee on Monday, the Prime Minister faced repeated demands to spell out exactly when his much touted spending pledge would be delivered. Instead, he offered little more than vague assurances, insisting plans would be revealed “in due course”, a phrase that will do little to reassure military chiefs or a concerned public.
The Government has already committed to raising defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, with an ambition to reach 3.5 per cent by 2035. But the glaring gap in the middle, when Britain would actually reach 3 per cent, remains unanswered, despite pressure from MPs across all parties.
Pressed by Tan Dhesi, the Labour chairman of the defence committee, to “chart out a path” before the next election, Sir Keir sidestepped the question. “We’ve already committed to 2.5 per cent in 2027 and we’ll hit that,” he said. “We have made that commitment to 3 per cent in the next Parliament and to 3.5 per cent in 2035.” What he did not say, crucially, is when that 3 per cent target would actually be met.
Behind the scenes, the situation appears no clearer. The long delayed Defence Investment Plan, intended to map out spending over the next decade, remains unpublished. Originally expected in the autumn, it is still being held up by wrangling between the Treasury and the Ministry of Defence, amid claims of a staggering £28 billion funding shortfall over the next four years.
FIERY CLASH AS PM ACCUSED OF COMPLACENCY
Tensions boiled over when Sir Bernard Jenkin challenged the Prime Minister on Britain’s readiness for conflict. “The chiefs of staff are saying we need to be ready for war. So when are we going to be prepared and prepared for what?” he asked.
As Sir Keir attempted to respond by pointing to ongoing work on the investment plan, Sir Bernard cut in bluntly: “It smacks of an enormous complacency.”
The Prime Minister hit back, blaming years of underinvestment by previous governments, accusing them of “the stripping out and hollowing out of our Armed Forces”. Yet he later conceded the uncomfortable truth, Britain is not on a “war footing”, largely because the funding decisions have still not been made.
For critics, that admission will ring alarm bells.
Colonel Hamish de Bretton Gordon, a former tank commander, did not mince his words. With tensions escalating globally, he warned that delay is indefensible. “We are on the precipice at the moment of conflict in the Middle East, we have got what’s happening in Ukraine, things could not require spending on defence more than any other time probably since the Second World War,” he said. “It’s just bonkers to keep kicking this into the long grass. Is this not the priority?”
A SHRINKING NAVY AND SLOW RESPONSE
Recent events have only sharpened concerns. Following the attack on RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, Britain was slow to respond, eventually dispatching HMS Dragon, a Type 45 destroyer, which arrived three weeks after the strike.
The delay highlighted the stark reality of a diminished Royal Navy. Of Britain’s six destroyers, only two are currently operational, the rest tied up in maintenance and repairs.
Meanwhile, allies moved faster. France redeployed its Charles de Gaulle carrier group to the eastern Mediterranean with urgency, underlining the contrast.
TREASURY GRIDLOCK AND GROWING FRUSTRATION
At the heart of the paralysis is a familiar standoff. Chancellor Rachel Reeves is reportedly resisting calls for a significant increase in defence spending, questioning whether the Ministry of Defence can justify the cost.
In the Commons, Defence Secretary John Healey faced his own grilling. Asked whether the Defence Investment Plan would finally be published before Parliament rises, he offered no firm date.
Shadow defence minister James Cartlidge did not hold back, describing the situation as “entering the realms of farce”. He warned that critical upgrades, including missile defence improvements under the Sea Viper Evolution programme, are now effectively on hold pending the elusive plan.
“This really matters,” he said. “Starmer needs to get a grip and instruct his Chancellor to take the difficult decisions.”
Adding to the sense of drift, Healey sparked disbelief with remarks suggesting that leasing a military base for 99 years could be more secure than owning it outright. The claim has been met with incredulity.
Imagine thinking it is more secure to lease than to own. For many observers, it raises serious questions about the Government’s strategic judgement.
The view stands in stark contrast to that of Admiral Lord of Spithead, who warned in June 2025: “How can the base, which serves as an indispensable naval, air, and intelligence asset, be more secure under the sovereignty of another nation, rather than our own?”
A DANGEROUS MOMENT, AND NO CLEAR PLAN
All of this unfolds against a backdrop of rising global instability, from the Middle East to Eastern Europe. Yet Britain’s defence posture appears stuck in limbo, with promises made but no clear roadmap to deliver them.
An independent report by EY Parthenon has already warned that current plans could leave an enormous long term shortfall in defence funding, with key infrastructure projects still unfunded.
For a government keen to project strength on the world stage, the reality looks far less assured. Critics say the Prime Minister’s reluctance to set a timeline is not caution, it is avoidance.
And as threats grow, the question remains, how long can Britain afford to wait for answers?
