← Back to House of Commons Debates
Integrated Review Refresh
13 March 2023
Lead MP
James Cleverly
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
UkraineDefenceCulture, Media & SportScience & TechnologyBusiness & Trade
Other Contributors: 41
At a Glance
James Cleverly raised concerns about integrated review refresh 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
UkraineDefenceCulture, Media & SportScience & TechnologyBusiness & Trade
Government Statement
James Cleverly made a statement on the 2023 integrated review refresh, highlighting the UK's strategic approach to global challenges. He noted that two years ago, the Government set out a comprehensive strategy in response to an increasingly competitive world. The statement emphasised the UK’s leadership role globally, including its commitment to Ukraine and efforts against China's aggressive behavior. Key measures include increasing defence spending by £5 billion over the next two years, establishing a new directorate to counter hostile information manipulation, doubling funding for Chinese expertise, creating an integrated security fund, and launching initiatives related to economic deterrence, cybersecurity, and semiconductor strategy. The statement also highlighted plans for AUKUS submarine capabilities and additional BBC World Service funding.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda
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?
Minister reply
The additional £5 billion is part of a broader strategy to enhance national security. While some funds will support AUKUS and Ukraine replenishment, the allocation also includes measures to address capability gaps in our defence systems.
Sandy Martin
SNP
Stirling
Question
How does the UK's approach towards Russia compare with its strategy for China? Is there a difference?
Minister reply
The UK’s response to Russia focuses on immediate security threats and sanctions enforcement, while the approach towards China involves long-term strategic investment in technology and resilience against economic instability.
Kevan Jones
Lab
North Durham
Question
What specific steps are being taken to improve military readiness and combat capability?
Minister reply
The Government is investing heavily in training, equipment modernisation, and technology innovation. Specific measures include increasing funding for the armed forces and enhancing cyber security capabilities.
David Lammy
Lab
Tottenham
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.
Minister reply
I am not a religious man, but I understand that there is a phrase in the Bible about how there is more joy in heaven over a sinner who repents, and it is really good to hear—[Interruption.] As I say, I am not a religious man, but I am joyful that those on the Labour Front Bench have finally, perhaps kicking and screaming, come to such a realisation. Let us take official development assistance. At its lowest point, this Government are still spending a larger proportion of GDP on ODA than at the highest point under the Labour party when it was in government.
Alicia Kearns
Con
Rutland and Stamford
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.
Minister reply
Acknowledges the importance of security threats beyond economics. Assures that risks will be considered across all sectors and not just limited to private sector support.
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.
Minister reply
States that the aggressor must pay for damage caused to Ukraine. Defends UK's nuclear deterrent as a key part of NATO defence.
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.
Minister reply
Commits to 2.5% of GDP on defence, announces an additional £5 billion to address Russia's invasion impact, and reaffirms the importance of NATO collective defence.
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.
Minister reply
Clarifies that the additional money will be used for specific commitments and not just to stand still.
Question
Welcomes commitment to 2.5% of GDP on defence and AUKUS agreement but asks for alignment between foreign and defence policies.
Minister reply
Assures that defence, diplomacy, development and trade policy are closely coordinated as part of the integrated reviews.
Liam Byrne
Lab
Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North
Question
Acknowledges need to defend values in China relations while working on global public goods. Critiques current tilt towards Indo-Pacific region as insufficient.
Minister reply
Defends long-term commitment to the Indo-Pacific, highlighting visits to key countries and investments in resources.
Mark Francois
Con
Rayleigh and Wickford
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.
Minister reply
Agreed with the questioner about AUKUS and stated that Labour will not match the 2.5% commitment on defence spending due to their reluctance to do so.
Derek Twigg
Lab
Widnes and Halewood
Question
Critiqued the £5 billion funding announcement as inadequate, particularly in comparison with inflationary costs.
Minister reply
Defended the £5 billion allocation by comparing it to the prison budget, suggesting that Labour's attitude towards public expenditure is frivolous.
Saqib Bhatti
Con
Meriden and Solihull East
Question
Acknowledged China as a significant challenge for the 21st century and asked about building relationships in the Indo-Pacific region.
Minister reply
Agreed on China’s influence, emphasising the need to develop new friendships and partnerships while addressing concerns through diplomacy.
Dave Doogan
SNP
Angus and Perthshire Glens
Question
Suggested that the announced £5 billion is insufficient given inflationary pressures, conflicts in Europe, and commitments to Indo-Pacific involvement.
Minister reply
Defended nuclear spending as crucial for Euro-Atlantic defence posture and highlighted tax contributions of armed forces stationed in Scotland.
Alec Shelbrooke
Con
Wetherby and Easingwold
Question
Asked the minister to consider renewable energy diversification, especially regarding critical minerals processed in China.
Minister reply
Agreed on the need for reducing dependency on hydrocarbon energy and suggested processing minerals closer to their extraction sites.
Question
Asked about the Foreign Office’s stance towards proscribing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, citing its involvement in 15 kidnap and assassination attempts.
Minister reply
Confirmed that decisions on future designations or sanctions are made across Government without speculating further.
Question
Expressed concern about the adequacy of 2.5% GDP for defence, questioning whether it will support diplomatic efforts effectively.
Minister reply
Stressed the coordination between defence, diplomacy, and international development to ensure efficient use of public funds.
Richard Foord
Lib Dem
Honiton and Sidmouth
Question
Inquired about the Dreadnought acquisition programme's costs and whether £3 billion announced for nuclear is separate from a pre-set contingency.
Minister reply
Clarified that detailed expenditure will be outlined by the Chancellor, noting past Liberal Democrats’ contribution to defence.
Question
Asked about the adequacy of investment in Army and Air Mobility Force against international challenges.
Minister reply
Reiterated the importance of aligning foreign affairs with defence expenditure for effective use of taxpayers' money.
Dan Jarvis
Lab
Barnsley North
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?
Minister reply
The £5 billion brings us up to about 2.25% of GDP, which is well on track to that 2.5% commitment. The details of how the Secretary of State for Defence will spend his budget I will have to leave to the Secretary of State for Defence.
Chingford and Woodford Green
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?
Minister reply
We recognise that international relations are more complicated, so in the IR refresh there is more of a narrative than a single-word description. We describe areas where we can and should work more closely with China, the areas where we need to defend ourselves against it, and the areas where we want to steer China into a different course.
Hilary Benn
Lab
Leeds South
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?
Minister reply
Ultimately NATO has shown itself to be the most effective mechanism for the defence of the Euro-Atlantic region. The UK will continue to be one of the leading contributory nations to NATO.
Bernard Jenkin
Con
Harwich and North Essex
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.
Minister reply
We are proud that we have the additional £5 billion that we have announced on top of the money previously announced in 2020. We need to grow the economy so that we can have a larger defence budget in absolute terms.
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?
Minister reply
In absolute terms and in percentage terms, the UK is still one of the largest official development assistance donating countries in the world. The UK hugely values its contribution, our expertise and the co-operation we have with partners around the world.
Question
Does the Foreign Secretary accept that one-off increases are ad hoc, sporadic and make long-term planning difficult?
Minister reply
Of course, we need discrete responses to one-off events such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but those are within a wider framework of international posture. The Prime Minister has made it clear that this is part of the journey towards our baseline of spending 2.5% of GDP on defence.
Stephen Kinnock
Lab
Aberavon
Question
Does the Foreign Secretary agree that we need an in-depth strategic audit of every aspect of our country’s relationship with China?
Minister reply
We are looking at how China interacts with the British state, both at a Government level and in other areas, including the commercial world, the public sector and education. We must go into whatever relationship we have with China with our eyes open.
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.
Minister reply
In a document that we are trying to make modest in page number but wide in aspiration, we have to be disciplined in how much we put across. We are very conscious of the risk to the Arctic.
Paula Barker
Lab
Liverpool Wavertree
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?
Minister reply
When the impacts of covid were felt across the world, every Government had to make difficult decisions. We have been able to work with the BBC World Service to ensure it delivers its services in the most efficient manner and that we are able to support it with this increase in funding.
Kit Malthouse
Con
North West Hampshire
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?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend is right to say that organised criminal gangs have an international component. This document is predominantly but not exclusively focused on state-level threats. However, I assure him that the role of international organised crime gangs is very much part of our interactions with our interlocutors internationally.
Andrew Gwynne
Ind
Gorton and Denton
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?
Minister reply
I genuinely thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that issue. Although we have not made many references to the Commonwealth discretely in this review, the Commonwealth is interwoven through much of what we do. The geographical nature of the Commonwealth means, inevitably, that our Indo-Pacific tilt will be delivered in partnership with Commonwealth countries.
Maldon
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?
Minister reply
I suspect that my right hon. Friend knows that he is pushing at the most open of open doors on that. He is right to say that the UK’s projection of soft power—along with Chevening, Marshall and other scholarships—is incredibly powerful and cost-effective.
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?
Minister reply
I can assure the hon. Gentleman that it will remain at the heart of the UK’s foreign policy to work in partnership and with partners. We need to make sure that we maintain our tradition as an open, free-trading nation, working closely with those countries that share our values and protect our interests.
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?
Minister reply
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s work in this area. She is right: freedom of religion or belief is a litmus test for good behaviours by Government. Where those freedoms are impinged, that is typically the canary in the mine for other human rights abuses.
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?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman should listen when we make statements at the Dispatch Box, because we have made the commitment to get back up to 0.7%. As I said in response to the hon. Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Ms Qaisar), we remain, both in percentage and absolute terms, one of the largest aid donors in the world.
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?
Minister reply
It is incumbent on us to make sure that we understand China better. I am not fatalistic about our future relationship with China. The job of foreign affairs and diplomacy is to try to influence and improve.
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?
Minister reply
The hon. Lady is right that a conflict across the Taiwan strait would be disastrous not just for the region but for the global economy. The UK’s position is long standing and well versed: we do not agree with any unilateral change of posture across the Taiwan strait and we will continue to work to de-escalate where there are tensions.
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?
Minister reply
We have fantastic defence industries here in the UK. I think the reason countries are keen to work with us on projects such as AUKUS, the future combat air system and others is that internationally they recognise the huge value added to defence systems by the engagement of the UK.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
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?
Minister reply
The hon. and gallant Gentleman makes an important point: just because new threats have emerged, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the old threats do not go away. We are seeing a full-spectrum attack by Russia, including cyber-attack, missile attack, tank attack and trench warfare around Bakhmut. It is not a case of either/or; it has to be both. The integrated review refresh recognises that, and we will ensure we cover all the areas where we need to defend ourselves.
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.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right that the UK is proudly one of the most significant defence contributors to NATO and, in absolute and percentage terms, one of the largest aid spenders in the world. We recognise the importance of our soft power and will continue to invest in it as a core part of our foreign policy.
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?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right. This involves a whole-of-society approach over decades, including developing technical skills for those currently in primary school who will be needed in 20 or 30 years’ time. Advising careers towards this area is good investment as the jobs will be high-paid and long-term. We recognise it needs to be an all-encompassing effort.
Shadow Comment
David Lammy
Shadow Comment
David Lammy welcomed the announcement but criticised shortcomings in the original integrated review, such as oversight of geopolitical risks like the Taliban takeover and full-scale invasion of Ukraine. He highlighted areas where the UK has fallen short on promises, including cuts to development assistance and diplomatic presence in key regions. The shadow minister called for a reset addressing flaws from the past two years, emphasising the need for action on international law, supply chain security, and semiconductor strategy. While supporting continued defence spending for Ukraine and NATO allies, Lammy urged clearer plans and timetables for achieving long-term goals.
▸
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.