← Back to House of Commons Debates
Opposition Day
23 June 2026
Lead MP
James Cartlidge
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
DefenceEconomyNorthern IrelandForeign Affairs
Other Contributors: 44
At a Glance
James Cartlidge raised concerns about opposition day in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
Moves the motion expressing regret over the chaos in Government, particularly regarding the temporary Prime Minister's attendance at the NATO summit. Calls on the Government to spend 3% of GDP on defence by the end of this Parliament or provide £28 billion as requested by the Ministry of Defence. Emphasises the need for a robust Defence Investment Plan and criticises the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023.
Lindsay Hoyle
Lab
Chorley
Maintains order, addresses points of order regarding truthfulness in statements made during previous debates. Warns against using terms like 'truth' and 'facts' carelessly. Urges focus on the topic of defence spending.
Kieran Mullan
Con
South Dorset
Raises concerns over the lack of clarity regarding the new Prime Minister's stance on defence issues, highlighting a potential risk to national security due to uncertainty.
Alec Shelbrooke
Con
Elmet and Rothwell
Expresses concern about the capital ship programme, suggesting that plans for Type 83 destroyers may have been delayed or mothballed six months prior. Criticises perceived misallocation of defence funds.
Andrew Murrison
Con
South West Wiltshire
Highlights the contrast between Poland's and Britain's defence spending, criticising the current Government for prioritising non-defence projects over military expenditure. Expresses concern about Britain's standing with allies.
Luke Akehurst
Con
Wellingborough
Inquires about potential sources of capital to fund increased defence spending, challenging the Opposition to specify from which budgets they would allocate funds.
Esther McVey
Con
Tatton
Clarifies the Prime Minister's financial offer for the Defence Investment Plan, indicating it was a 0.08% increase in GDP, which prompted the resignation of the Defence Secretary.
Wendy Morton
Con
Aldridge-Brownhills
Critiques the Government's inability to provide stability and certainty on defence issues amid internal chaos. Emphasises the need for a consistent policy approach.
Paul Holmes
Lab
Leyland and Wyre
Warns against treating the Defence Investment Plan as a political football, stressing that delays could harm domestic and international defence supply chains.
Tim Farron
Lib Dem
Westmorland and Lonsdale
Calls for cross-party recognition of the evolving security threats since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Advocates for a collaborative approach to defend Britain effectively.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Supports the focus on new technologies and warfare strategies, particularly in relation to artificial intelligence and drones. Emphasises the importance of keeping up with advancing technology.
Highlights the impact of delayed DIP on Britain's ability to compete in space technology, suggesting that a dedicated space strategy is necessary.
Alex Ballinger
Lab
Coventry North East
Welcomes current investments in air defence, contrasting them with cuts made under previous administrations. Acknowledges lessons learned from the situation in Ukraine.
Highlights the massive impact on morale due to successive real-terms pay cuts given to armed forces during Conservative rule.
Reminds Minister about troops being removed from Europe back to UK, asks if she is critical of this decision made in response to changing geopolitical landscape and not opposed by Labour at the time.
Questions whether blame should shift to Liberal Democrats for delaying submarine project under coalition government, impacting Barrow-in-Furness economically.
Andrew Murrison
Con
South West Wiltshire
Asks Minister if recreating British Army of the Rhine is Government policy and how it will be funded, given the current hostile situation since WWII.
Questions Minister about how to square the circle of making some of the biggest cuts to armed forces during most hostile situation since WWII unless more funding comes forward.
Harriett Baldwin
Con
West Worcestershire
Asks if everything is so great, why Lord Robertson describes the Government's situation as one of 'corrosive complacency'.
Encourages Minister to talk about figures on reduction in number of armed forces personnel and officers during her service period, and asks what Labour Government is doing to support armed forces personnel.
Critiques the effect that our armed forces deliver on a shoestring due to delayed DIP, raises concerns about investment by primes not happening this financial year, allies' view of UK's disarray and adversaries seeing UK as unable to defend itself.
Wendy Morton
Con
Aldridge-Brownhills
Asks Minister a question on matter (context unclear).
Al Pinkerton
Liberal Democrats
Defends the amendment, highlighting genuine problems with recruitment, retention, morale, and housing. Criticises the Conservative motion for not acknowledging cuts to troops under their watch. Emphasises the need for deeper co-operation with European allies and criticises the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill.
Graeme Downie
Lab
West Dunbartonshire
Thanked armed forces personnel and acknowledged the debate's timing during Armed Forces Week. Agreed with the notion of substance over flag-waving in political discourse. Shared personal experiences growing up near the Berlin Wall to emphasise understanding of cold war threats, contrasting it with current generations' lack thereof. Emphasised the ongoing conflict with Russia across various domains including cyber-space and misinformation warfare, urging public recognition of these threats. Advocated for clearer communication on how increased defence spending protects daily lives and infrastructure, linking security needs directly to economic impacts like energy costs and potential blackouts. Highlighted the Government's progress in preparing armed forces for future challenges after inheriting 'hollowed-out' resources; mentioned significant contracts awarded since July 2024 including a £10 billion frigate deal with Norway for Scotland and pressing for an £8 billion Typhoon jet deal with Turkey. Pledged support for recruitment, retention policies, and veterans’ care as part of national defence strategy.
Lincoln Jopp
Con
South Antrim
Jopp spoke about his military career, the risks taken by successive governments since the Cold War, and the current state of defence in the UK. He emphasised the need for immediate rearmament due to real threats from enemies who are now close. He highlighted that NATO ranks the UK 31st out of 32 countries in terms of rearmament efforts. Jopp called for a more agile procurement system and greater openness about current threats, suggesting that this is necessary to secure public support for increased defence spending.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Duncan Smith interjected to recall Francis Fukuyama’s paper 'The End of History', which suggested an end to war and pressure, leading people to believe armed forces were no longer necessary. He agreed with Jopp that this was a mistake that has affected everything since.
Al Carns
Lab
Birmingham Selly Oak
Carns interjected to clarify his comments about drones, stating there is a requirement to bring drones into the system for training and teaching tactics. He acknowledged that innovation in drone technology changes rapidly and if bought en masse, would quickly become outdated.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
Cartlidge agreed with Jopp's point about procuring drones being critical for the country. He suggested thinking of SMEs as mission partners and buying a service rather than hardware, advocating for constant iteration to survive in conflicts like Ukraine.
Brian Leishman
Lab
In the debate, Mr. Brian Leishman emphasised the importance of political honesty and highlighted that any increase in defence spending would necessitate cuts to other areas, particularly welfare. He cited an example from a recent session he organised with his Labour colleague Ian Byrne, discussing food insecurity and poverty in Grangemouth. The session revealed that 30,000 people used food banks in 2010 compared to over 3 million today. Leishman criticised the low national minimum wage and living wage figures, stating that they are insufficient for a country with one of the world's largest economies where 14% of children go hungry.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Mr. Duncan Smith highlighted the importance of defending veterans' rights, particularly in Northern Ireland, as a critical aspect of government responsibility. He urged for an increase in defence spending to at least 3% by the end of this Parliament, advocating that it should rise further to 4% or 5%. He emphasised historical lessons from the late 1930s and early 1940s when Britain faced a similar threat from totalitarian states and stepped up its military preparedness.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
Mr. Francois intervened to support Mr. Duncan Smith's arguments, recalling his efforts with other MPs to defend veterans' interests during meetings at the Northern Ireland Office as Back Benchers.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Mr. Lewis challenged arguments against the previous Conservative legislation and suggested that repealing it would make finding out the truth about loved ones less likely, while also asserting that all are treated equally under existing laws.
Ms. Taylor agreed with Mr. Duncan Smith's comments and pointed out that had defence spending been maintained at 2.5% of GDP since 2010, an additional £90 billion would have been invested in defence.
Luke Akehurst
Con
North Durham
Akesworth argues for a sustained uplift in defence spending, emphasising the need to listen to Defence Secretary's concerns about reducing readiness and increasing risk. He commends the new team of ministers for their commitment to national security and urges the Prime Minister to secure necessary funding before leaving office. Akesworth supports welfare reforms that would contribute to revenue but acknowledges that capital expenditure needs more exploration. He suggests reallocating funds from other Departments like Energy Security, highlighting potential sacrifices in infrastructure projects. The MP also discusses pressing threats from Russia, stressing the importance of conventional and nuclear deterrence capabilities, such as F-35A programme and long-range strike missiles. Akesworth highlights Labour's record on defence spending compared to the Conservative government, noting improvements in armed forces personnel pay, housing, recruitment policies, and overall size.
Stuart Anderson
Con
Dover
Mr. Anderson, a former military member and current MP with expertise in security and defence, emphasises the need for increased defence readiness and spending due to global instability. He cites historical precedents where demobilisation was appropriate but argues that current conditions necessitate higher defence expenditures. He highlights the importance of measuring defence capabilities from the end of World War II rather than the Cold War era. Mr. Anderson also discusses the three key areas of defence: readiness, lethality, and survivability, stressing the need for spiritual morale within armed forces despite material shortages. He critiques current procurement issues and the impact on military morale, calling for a balanced approach to funding that includes both immediate operational needs and future technological advancements.
Lincoln Jopp
Lab
Spelthorne
Agreed with Obese-Jecty on pilot training issues, citing personal experience of meeting an F-35 pilot who spent nine years in training before three months on the frontline.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
Supported Obese-Jecty's concerns about F-35 procurement delays, citing evidence from a Defence Committee visit to RAF Marham where pilots reported training times of six to ten years.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Mr Lewis argued that the current defence spending levels are insufficient compared to historical standards under Margaret Thatcher and emphasised the need for increased investment in deterrence. He highlighted concerns about the isolationist stance of the US and its impact on NATO's guarantee of mutual defence against potential aggressors, particularly Russia. Mr Lewis also stressed the importance of sending a strong signal across the Atlantic that the UK is committed to boosting military preparedness.
Katie Lam
Con
The Government must honour the implicit promise that military service will be repaid with respect and protection, and the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill is a direct betrayal of that commitment. This bill will see veterans dragged through courts decades after their service for actions taken under challenging conditions. The contrast in treatment between IRA terrorists who received immunity and armed forces personnel hounded by vexatious legal claims is stark. A specific incident involving SAS soldiers in 1991 demonstrates the unjust nature of such prosecutions, as those involved were subjected to legal harassment for decades despite a Court of Appeal ruling that their actions were lawful. The Bill opens doors to politically motivated prosecutions and undermines trust between current and future service personnel.
Paul Holmes
Con
Hambleton
Expresses sympathy for the Prime Minister but criticises the Government's handling of defence budget and investment plan. He mentions resignations of John Healey and Al Carns, highlighting their integrity and disappointment with current leadership. He points out the lack of decisive action and funding for military readiness despite known shortfalls since January 2023. Criticises the Minister for the Armed Forces for downplaying issues while her predecessor highlighted them. Warns about the potential consequences of indecision on defence preparedness, stressing the importance of a clear DIP to maintain international credibility and support defence businesses in his constituency. Discusses Finland's approach to national resilience compared to the UK’s, advocating for embedding defence awareness in education and civil society.
Sarah Bool
Con
Brackley
Defence of the realm is an essential insurance policy, and investing now is crucial to protect serving personnel and civilians. The delay in publishing the DIP has significant consequences for businesses like EKA, which are waiting for new orders. Concerns exist about the readiness of the NHS to cope with casualties from full-scale war, as there is a risk of a gap in medical capability due to deployed military personnel.
Gagan Mohindra
Lab
Brent Central
Labour's repeated delays and weak defence investment plan have weakened our defence industry at a critical time. The DIP, delayed five times, will only increase the risk to personnel on operations and could make the country less safe with an uplift of just 0.08% GDP by 2027. Conservatives advocate for increasing defence spending to 3% of GDP by the end of this Parliament and repurposing funding from official development assistance for defence.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
He emphasised the historical sacrifices of British soldiers, praised the UK’s support for Ukraine, criticised Labour's defence spending plans, expressed concerns over delays in publishing the DIP, highlighted issues with military programmes like E-7 Wedgetail and Ajax, and warned about the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill threatening national security.
Luke Pollard
Lab
Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport
Pollard thanked members for their contributions and praised the cross-party support. He mentioned increasing defence spending to meet challenges and ensuring British companies are involved in procurement. He addressed readiness, personnel, veterans' issues, and inherited problems from previous governments.
Holmes raised a point of order regarding the refusal by the Minister to give way during the debate. He questioned whether it was in order for a Minister not to respond to questions throughout their speech.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.