← Back to House of Commons Debates
UK Armed Forces
11 March 2024
Lead MP
James Cartlidge
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
UkraineDefenceEconomyEmployment
Other Contributors: 25
At a Glance
James Cartlidge raised concerns about uk armed forces in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
It is an honour to announce the outstanding work of our armed forces worldwide, including every NATO mission, support for Ukraine against Putin’s aggression, and tackling Houthi attacks in the Red sea. The UK is spending a record £24 billion extra on defence between 2020 and 2025, the largest increase since the end of the cold war. Our longer term aspiration is to invest 2.5% of GDP when fiscal and economic conditions allow. We are already exceeding NATO's target at over 2% of GDP. Defence equipment spending will rise to £288.6 billion over the next decade with a new procurement model for better acquisition. The Royal Navy will receive Dreadnought, Astute and AUKUS submarines, Type 26 and Type 21 frigates. Future Soldier programme transforms the Army's deployability and lethality. RAF will get sixth-generation fighter jets under Global Combat Air Programme. The Defence Command Paper outlines a credible war fighting force to protect and prosper the nation.
John Healey
Lab
Rawmarsh and Conisbrough
Question
Pays tribute to HMS Richmond’s actions in the Red Sea but criticises lack of new funding, noting that the budget will be cut by £2.5 billion next year. Raises concerns about recruitment issues and low satisfaction with service life.
Minister reply
Grateful for comments on HMS Richmond, clarifies budget as a 1.8% increase to £55.6 billion or 2.3% of GDP, significantly above the 2019 level. Notes highest Army applications in six years in January. Emphasises commitment despite economic challenges after Labour’s period in power. Challenges Labour's lack of clarity on defence spending.
Question
Agrees with Minister about capable armed forces but raises concern about the timing of 2.5% target, suggesting it should be based on threat level rather than economic conditions.
Minister reply
Understands need to ensure prudent fiscal approach before committing to public expenditure or tax cuts. Agrees with Defence Committee report on preparing for a more dangerous world while prioritising effective defence spending and reforming procurement system.
Question
The Minister should develop mitigations for dealing with the risk of allied support being curtailed or withdrawn if there is a change of Administration in Washington come November.
Minister reply
NATO is fundamental to UK defence, and we are supporting our allies, standing together under article 5. We recently launched Steadfast Defender involving 96,000 personnel, including almost 20,000 from the UK.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Question
Does the current defence spending match what we used to do during the cold war?
Minister reply
During the cold war era, due to the threat of an invasion in Germany, a higher percentage of GDP was spent on defence. Now with Putin's actions, we have had to increase support and our contribution to NATO.
Emma Lewell-Buck
Lab
South Shields
Question
The Secretary of State is failing to ensure that the entire defence ecosystem is ready.
Minister reply
We have provided extraordinary amounts of ordnance and artillery shells to Ukraine, showing our commitment despite procurement delays and budget issues.
Question
How might we spend more on defence given the increasing threats?
Minister reply
A defence review is a matter for the Prime Minister and Secretary of State, but data from Ukraine can inform our technological innovations to strengthen our defence.
Nick Smith
Lab
Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney
Question
Was there a cut of £2.5 billion in cash terms announced in the Budget last week?
Minister reply
If the Labour party wants to increase the size of the standing Army significantly, they need to commit to current spending levels, not just 2.5% when economic conditions allow.
Question
By what possible arithmetic does the Minister conclude we are in fact increasing defence spending?
Minister reply
Sustainable long-term investment is necessary for planning, and the country must be able to afford such commitments. We have not cut defence spending; it will rise by 1.8% in real terms.
Derek Twigg
Lab
Widnes and Halewood
Question
Does the Minister think most reasonable people would agree with not putting extra resources for defence?
Minister reply
The Prime Minister, when Chancellor, oversaw the biggest increase in spending since the cold war. The current Chancellor has significantly increased defence spending, leading to a 1.8% rise in real terms.
Bernard Jenkin
Con
Harwich and North Essex
Question
Is the right question to ask whether we are spending enough to prevent a war?
Minister reply
To support deterrence, we need to back our armed forces. We must balance capabilities against economic sustainability, focusing on new technologies like uncrewed weapons.
Tan Dhesi
Lab
Slough
Question
Why have the Government shrunk our Army to its smallest size since Napoleon?
Minister reply
January saw the highest number of applications to join the Army for six years. While the number of soldiers is a concern, we also consider accommodation and capabilities which are expensive.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
Question
As a former Armed Forces Minister, I pay high tribute to His Majesty’s armed forces but not to His Majesty’s Treasury. The Red Book—the Budget Bible—shows clearly in tables 2.1 and 2.2 that next year’s core defence budget has been cut by £2.5 billion.
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend was a Defence Minister, and I respect his great passion about all things related to the armed forces, particularly because of his father. When we spend on the nuclear deterrent or on supporting Ukraine—purchasing weapons and providing ordnance, ultimately to help defend ourselves—that is legitimately described as defence expenditure. After all, how else are we to pay for that, and from which budget? Compared with last year, there is a real-terms increase of 1.8%, which if we spend what we expect will amount to £55.6 billion and 2.3% of GDP.
Kenny MacAskill
Ind
Question
Many citizens will be rightly concerned about the use of the phrase “pre-war world”. What requires clarification is not simply the scale of the British military in years to come, but where the armed forces are currently deployed, and what they are doing. Are British servicemen firing weaponry in Ukraine, as suggested by German ministerial sources? Are British forces assisting Israel in its genocide through the provision of military intelligence?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman knows that we do not comment on speculation, particularly on sensitive operational matters relating to the armed forces, and that is the right approach. Yes, we have a duty of candour, but we also have to protect those serving on the frontline.
Desmond Swayne
Con
New Forest West
Question
The fighting in Ukraine proves that size matters. The Minister should reconstitute the Territorial Army, which demonstrated that, with economy, quantity had a quality all of its own.
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend has a quality all of his own, as shown in how he puts his questions. He makes a very good point. We tend to talk about the Regular Army, but we must remember our reserves. They are incredibly important and we pay tribute to them.
Andrew Gwynne
Ind
Gorton and Denton
Question
So there we have it: President Putin will be ordering his officers to stop sabre-rattling with the west because the British are changing their procurement rules! The reality is that the Minister cannot fight the war he wants to fight with the capability he has. He will be presented with the conflict that develops, and we need the capability and resilience to meet threats that emerge.
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman’s rather trite comment on procurement is a total failure to understand how the military works. He wants to talk about the deterrent; everything from our nuclear submarines right down to small arms is part of the procurement system.
John Baron
Con
Question
I join my hon. Friend in commending the professionalism of our armed forces, and in pointing out that Labour has not committed to an increase in defence spending, but may I remind him that the first duty of any Government is to ensure that defence spending primarily reflects the threat, rather than the ability to pay? We have a war in Europe. We have an increasingly belligerent Russia.
Minister reply
First of all, we have increased defence spending. Crucially, the last spending review saw the largest allocation of spending to defence since the cold war. Yes, we have set an aspiration of 2.5%, and the answer to when that will happen is: when economic conditions allow.
Barry Sheerman
Ind
Question
I do not want to make too much play of your earlier remarks, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I was born on the night the House was bombed and this Chamber was burned out. As I have listened to the Minister, I have been saying to myself—I hope that he will recall this—that he represents the party of Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher, but now that the world is more dangerous than I can recall it being in all my years, we are not able to defend the country adequately.
Minister reply
I pay respect to the hon. Gentleman’s longevity and seniority, and to the fact that on the day he was born, the House was bombed, during whichever war it was—I think it was the second world war. He said that we are unable to defend ourselves, and I totally and utterly reject that claim.
Mark Pritchard
Con
The Wrekin
Question
The hon. Member for Huddersfield referred to Members on both sides of the House. Is there not a clear distinction between Members on either side of the House, namely that from the Prime Minister and the Chancellor downwards there is a commitment and an agreement to defence spending amounting to 2.5% of GDP, while in stark contrast Labour Members, while suggesting that they are a Government in waiting, are not prepared to commit themselves to 2.5%, or even to our current spending commitments?
Minister reply
In my hon. Friend’s constituency, which I had the pleasure of visiting recently, there are many defence interests, and he has hit the nail on the head. We have heard all the theatrics, but the fact is that we have not a clue what the Opposition will spend on defence.
Munira Wilson
Lib Dem
Twickenham
Question
The conflict in Ukraine is a stark reminder of why we must take our defence incredibly seriously. The Minister has just said that the world is becoming a more dangerous place. Does he therefore agree that his Government’s decision to cut our UK troops to 10,000 was irresponsible, and will he commit himself to reversing those cuts and ensuring that the British Army is the requisite size to defend the United Kingdom and its allies?
Minister reply
As I have said, we have just committed 40% of the land force personnel to the Steadfast Defender exercise. NATO is the key to the defence of this nation, and indeed the whole continent, in conventional terms. We should recognise the enormous contribution of our armed forces, and the fact that we have increased spending significantly.
John Spellar
Ind
Question
The Minister conceded earlier that funding for Ukraine and the escalating nuclear cost were at the expense of restoring the viability of our frontline readiness, but deterrence is a lot cheaper than war. Surely our support for Ukraine and the deterrent should be a charge on the general fund, rather than further hollowing out our conventional armed forces.
Minister reply
I do not believe I made that point about nuclear. The right hon. Gentleman has said that these factors are at the expense of the frontline, but nuclear is the frontline.
Matt Western
Lab
Warwick and Leamington
Question
Looking at the figures for resource and capital departmental expenditure limits, it looks like there is a 7%—£2.5 billion —cut for this coming year. The Office for Budget Responsibility says that defence spending will be flat as a share of GDP. With Russia’s expenditure on its military at 40% of its total economy, why did the Secretary of State accept the reduction from the Chancellor and the Prime Minister?
Minister reply
I have explained why we do not believe that there has been a reduction; we believe that there will be a 1.8% increase in real terms. The hon. Gentleman says that spending as a percentage of GDP is flat. I point out that in 2019, it was 2.08%—just under 2.1%. We believe that if we spend everything we expect to in the next financial year, that will be 2.3%, which is a significant increase.
Justin Madders
Lab
Ellesmere Port and Bromborough
Question
I am sure that the Procurement Minister is aware of Survitec in my constituency, which has provided equipment to the armed forces for decades. He will acknowledge that the last few years have taught us the importance of having secure UK supply chains, and of getting good jobs to the whole country through the power of procurement. I invite him to come and speak to Survitec, so that he can hear directly from the company about its frustrations with the procurement process.
Minister reply
Before I was injured playing football for Parliament versus the Army, I always used to enjoy playing five-a-side with the hon. Gentleman. I would be delighted to accept his invitation to visit, because small and medium-sized enterprises and businesses are absolutely critical. As the Minister for Defence Procurement, and having run an SME, I believe that we have to have an environment that encourages investment in defence and supports our domestic supply chain. A key part of that is exportability. I look forward to discussing these matters with the company that he mentions.
Hitchin
Question
The shocking state of Army accommodation is a big driver of the recruitment and retention challenges that we face, so it will not come as a surprise to hear that I am yet again raising the issue of the shocking standard of accommodation at the Chicksands base. When I catch up with serving personnel over a pint or two at our local pub in Shefford, there is a growing sense of resignation about the future of the base, but there is real concern that its planned closure will mean that the situation goes unadjusted, and that really poor accommodation units are not improved. To do right by those personnel, will the Minister commit to revisiting the Government’s decision not to upgrade either of the two service bases in my constituency, where hundreds of beds fall into grades 3 or 4?
Minister reply
We engaged with this issue in the hon. Gentleman’s Westminster Hall debate on accommodation, in which I announced our plans for Chicksands. I entirely accept that this is a matter on which there should be engagement with the local community, and that there will be a range of views. I emphasise that we have put an extra £400 million into accommodation, which has allowed us to deliver our winter plan highly effectively. There has been a massive increase in the number of properties in the defence estate benefiting from damp and mould packages, but also from new doors and so on, to deal with long-standing issues in the estate, and I am keen to do more.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
I thank the Minister for his answers to the questions posed to him. There can be no doubt that the Government must do more to increase defence spending, given that a large portion of our defence budget has rightly been spent on assisting Ukraine. However, we must ensure that other issues are not left behind. Unfortunately, there was no mention in last week’s Budget of an additional funding increase for our armed forces. Will the Minister increase our defence budget, so that we can ensure that our actions speak louder than words, and so that promises are kept, and our armed forces can keep us safe?
Minister reply
As ever, we have saved the best till last. I think the hon. Gentleman has attended every urgent question or statement I have ever been involved in, and I pay tribute to him for that, and for the way that he represents his constituents in Northern Ireland, particularly those who serve in the armed forces. They have always been a huge part of our British military story. I have always paid tribute to them and the industry—for example, Thales—for their contribution. Last week, I had the pleasure of meeting representatives of a brilliant SME from Northern Ireland that is supporting the Royal Air Force. I have been clear that we had the largest increase in defence spending since the cold war at the last spending review, further funding in the Budget thereafter, and a commitment to spending 2.5% of GDP when the economy can support that.
Shadow Comment
John Healey
Shadow Comment
Honouring HMS Richmond’s actions, but criticising the lack of new funding for defence in the Budget despite calls for 2.5% spending from ministers. The budget will be cut by £2.5 billion in cash terms next year. Concerns raised about underfunding and hollowing out of armed forces over the last 14 years, recruitment issues, low satisfaction with service life. Calls for a clear plan to better defend Britain.
▸
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.