Integrated Review Refresh

Question

How will the additional £5 billion be allocated? Is it just for AUKUS and Ukraine replenishment, or are there other areas that will benefit?

Question

How does the UK's approach towards Russia compare with its strategy for China? Is there a difference?

Question

What specific steps are being taken to improve military readiness and combat capability?

Question

It is very good to see you in your place, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. Just over a year ago, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine marked a watershed moment for European security. In the time since, 25 NATO countries have revisited their security strategies. Germany announced a fundamental shift in its security policy. Finland and Sweden have taken the historic decision to join NATO.

Question

Welcomes the Foreign Affairs Committee's recommendations but highlights that the threat of China extends beyond economic interests. Asks for greater resolve in dealing with transnational repression, shutting down illegal Chinese police stations and closing Iranian regime cut-outs operating in London. Also asks about using frozen central bank funds to rebuild Ukraine.

Question

Welcomes some aspects of the review but criticises gaps in strategy, calls for reassessment of Russia policy, and urges the use of frozen assets to rebuild Ukraine. Raises concerns over lack of focus on climate crisis and EU rebuilding. Questions whether nuclear spending is necessary given current threats.

Question

Highlights the need for hard power in international affairs and criticises cuts made under previous integrated review. Asks for increased defence spending to 2.5% of GDP.

Question

Critiques the reduction in UK's defence budget from 2010-2021. Questions if the announced £5 billion increase is sufficient to meet current needs as suggested by the Defence Secretary.

Question

Welcomes commitment to 2.5% of GDP on defence and AUKUS agreement but asks for alignment between foreign and defence policies.

Question

Acknowledges need to defend values in China relations while working on global public goods. Critiques current tilt towards Indo-Pacific region as insufficient.

Question

Welcomed the Foreign Secretary's commitment to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence from 2025 and inquired about Labour’s stance, also mentioning AUKUS programme as a significant collaboration.

Question

Critiqued the £5 billion funding announcement as inadequate, particularly in comparison with inflationary costs.

Question

Acknowledged China as a significant challenge for the 21st century and asked about building relationships in the Indo-Pacific region.

Question

Suggested that the announced £5 billion is insufficient given inflationary pressures, conflicts in Europe, and commitments to Indo-Pacific involvement.

Question

Asked the minister to consider renewable energy diversification, especially regarding critical minerals processed in China.

Question

Asked about the Foreign Office’s stance towards proscribing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, citing its involvement in 15 kidnap and assassination attempts.

Question

Expressed concern about the adequacy of 2.5% GDP for defence, questioning whether it will support diplomatic efforts effectively.

Question

Inquired about the Dreadnought acquisition programme's costs and whether £3 billion announced for nuclear is separate from a pre-set contingency.

Question

Asked about the adequacy of investment in Army and Air Mobility Force against international challenges.

Question

The Foreign Secretary referred to a further £5 billion over the next two years, and to the commitment to spend 2.5% of UK GDP on defence. Let me ask him, very simply, when the 2.5% commitment will come into effect, and where that leaves the British Army. Will there be further cuts?

Question

I welcome some of the report, but I want to return to the issue of China. Does that now mean that China is a threat, or an epoch-defining challenge?

Question

Given the close way in which we have been working with our European allies to resist Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is it not now time to seek a formal foreign policy and security partnership with the European Union alongside our leading role in NATO?

Question

The £5 billion announced today will patch up what we should have been spending already, but it is not going to make a huge difference.

Question

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that, following his Department’s devastating international aid cuts, the UK Government cannot claim to be fully safeguarding vulnerable communities around the world?

Question

Does the Foreign Secretary accept that one-off increases are ad hoc, sporadic and make long-term planning difficult?

Question

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that we need an in-depth strategic audit of every aspect of our country’s relationship with China?

Question

Frankly, I think the threat is quite substantial, so I am disappointed by the oft-repeated hope for the Arctic to return to being a region of high cooperation and low tension.

Question

The extra funding being made available to the BBC World Service is particularly welcome. The World Service does an admirable job of supplying news in a world of disinformation, so why did the Government decide to cut its funding in the first place?

Question

Given that the biggest killer of our people, the most frequent breaches of our border and, arguably, the most significant impact to the integrity of our economy result from the work of overseas organised criminal gangs, why is there hardly any mention of them in this document? Where is the resource to allow the National Crime Agency to deal with threats that are felt on the streets of the Secretary of State’s constituency and mine every day?

Question

I refer to my entries in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I was pleased that the Foreign Secretary referred to today being Commonwealth Day, but a little disappointed that there was only a passing reference to the Commonwealth, in that he is meeting Foreign Ministers from member states in the coming week. How does he envisage the integrated review refresh in terms of Britain developing a modern, dynamic, refreshed friendship with many of those Commonwealth countries?

Question

Does my right hon. Friend agree that soft power can often be as effective as hard power, if not more so, and that it is usually a lot cheaper? I therefore strongly welcome the additional funding for the BBC World Service, but will he go on to look at strengthening the support for other soft power projections, such as the British Council and the Chevening scholarship and John Smith Trust fellowship programmes?

Question

William Gladstone’s third Midlothian speech said that good foreign policy started with “good government at home”. We can see that in the US with President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act, and even in the European Union being jolted into responding with similar initiatives. But the somewhat vague promises in the document published today of a protective security authority, an economic deterrence initiative, a critical minerals strategy and a UK semiconductor strategy leave me somewhat wanting more. Can the Foreign Secretary expand on those things?

Question

A commitment to promoting freedom of religion or belief was included in the last integrated review, and it is good to hear from the Foreign Secretary that the approach to working on this refresh has been one of evolution. Does he agree that the UK continuing to take a leading role in promoting and protecting freedom of religion or belief across the world, and working with like-minded countries to challenge abuses, are even more important today than they were in the 2021 review?

Question

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that it is no longer Government policy to view the aid budget as a giant cash machine in the sky, and does he recognise that where cuts have been made, they have had a tangible and negative impact? Why will he not show the same ambition to return to 0.7% gross national income for aid spending as he is showing to get to 2.5% GNI for defence spending?

Question

I welcome the integrated review refresh. On China’s capabilities, as, I think, the only Mandarin and Cantonese speaker in the House, I encourage the Foreign Secretary to increase the number of Great Britain-China Centre courses, both for civil servants and for parliamentarians. Does he agree that although our national interests are not always the same, we all share a strong interest in an open, international order, so we should sharply increase FCDO Chevening scholarships, British Council scholarships, armed forces’ course scholarships, and Westminster Foundation for Democracy programmes in the Indo-Pacific region?

Question

Some analysts believe that a war over Taiwan’s sovereignty could occur in the second half of this decade. Although the Prime Minister has voiced his wish over the past 24 hours to continue to engage with China, does the Foreign Secretary agree that conflict in that region would have devastating impacts and that we must protect Taiwan’s rights as an independent nation?

Question

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government’s commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP will not only help to keep us safe, but create much more certainty for the 390,000 UK jobs, many of them high paying and high skilled, in places such as Filton and Bradley Stoke, which rely on our defence spending?

Question

I thank the Secretary of State very much for his statement and welcome the Government announcement regarding the increase in defence spending. I note that the increase is in response to Russia and other global concerns and that the Secretary of State referred to the increase in cyber and technology, but it is also important to have an increase of soldiers on the ground. Is it not possible to have both cyber and technology, and boots on the ground?

Question

Britain’s soft power is a strategic asset for two reasons—first, it gives us a strategic advantage in the world, and secondly, it gives us a platform to build relationships with allies to contain and resist anti-democratic and authoritarian regimes around the world.

Question

The £5 billion investment in defence spending for AUKUS offers substantial opportunities but also challenges in terms of skilling up people for the nuclear enterprise and submarine-building programme. What cross-Government discussions are taking place now to ensure we are fit for that challenge?