To clarify the record, I am a great friend of Ukraine and it would be quite wrong to be misunderstood. No, absolutely not; we must of course remove Russia from Ukraine if we possibly can. None the less, the hope that we can remove the Russian troops swiftly or easily, and that they will somehow just go away, is a fallacious vision and we must not slip down that track.

The Minister is surely correct in saying that we must be prepared for a long struggle, but it is vital, of course, that the Ukrainians have a continuing supply of arms to support their war effort. Is he absolutely confident that we have the manufacturing capability and the necessary supply chains to produce the weapons required by the Ukrainians?

I thank the Minister for his resolute address to the Chamber today, and we totally support his message. There is no doubt about the determination of this United Kingdom and the west to move forward. I do not know whether it is real, made up or cosmetic, but is there a difference of opinion between the leader of the Wagner Group and Putin? Does that undermine the Russians in Ukraine?

I draw the House’s attention to my interest. The Minister knows of the resolute support on the Labour side of the House for Ukraine and for much of what he has set out. Russia is also seeking to sow division and destabilise elsewhere, including in the western Balkans, where we have an important and significant presence with the KFOR mission in Kosovo. Is the Minister aware of reports in the past 24 hours of serious tensions and attacks on police officers, with the detention today of three Kosovan police officers and their removal to Serbia? What conversations will he be having with KFOR and our allies in the region to ensure that that situation is dealt with?

I do not want to put the Minister on the spot in the Chamber, but can he update the House on any efforts to reward that service with a continuous at sea deterrent medal?

The USA has vetoed a reinforcement of the NATO headquarters in Kosovo. That is just encouraging the Russians to carry on fomenting instability. I would not be against the UK’s reinforcing EUFOR, or European Union Force Bosnia and Herzegovina, there. We are not against European co-operation in defence, and just because it is an EU force, we should not have some religious doctrine that prevents us from co-operating with it just as we would with a NATO force.

I believe the Minister is going to come back to the issue of the Balkans, and the United States is somewhat disengaged from what is developing there. The trade and co-operation agreement, the Brexit deal, did not primarily include security. While recognising that NATO is the cornerstone of European security, the European Union plays a role in other aspects of non-state security across Europe, so would my right hon. Friend be minded to look at an opportunity for us to endeavour to strengthen our relationship and co-operation with the EU on that front?

The UK should reaffirm its unity in supporting Ukraine, given the current counter-offensive and the need for NATO solidarity. The Minister acknowledged the importance of continuing support for Ukraine despite the progress made in reclaiming territory. He also questioned what new aid is being provided to Ukraine now that their offensive has begun, and raised concerns about ongoing issues with MOD procurement and manpower shortages within the armed forces. John Healey called for a deep rethink of defence plans due to geopolitical changes since Putin's invasion last year but noted strategic inertia from British Ministers over such rethinking.

Inquired about the future vision for defence spending if Labour were to form the next Government, highlighting the increase in current defence spending compared to 2010 levels under the previous Labour government.

Supported John Healey's critique of inadequate MOD procurement and raised concerns about a potential capability gap due to the retirement of the Hercules fleet, suggesting that it needs urgent attention despite praise for armed forces personnel.

Mr Ellwood pays tribute to the Minister for his opening remarks and acknowledges the valiant work of the armed forces. He notes that while the world is becoming more dangerous, the UK's approach to globalisation has shifted towards isolationism, impacting both security and economy negatively. The deterioration in international security is directly linked to economic instability as seen with Ukraine, suggesting an urgent need for increased defence spending despite current economic conditions. Mr Ellwood highlights significant reductions in naval vessels, aircraft squadrons, army divisions, and equipment, noting that the armed forces are not shaped to meet threats but trimmed to fit budgets. He criticises cuts to manpower, tanks, armoured vehicles, and artillery systems, warning that the UK is neither ready for war nor able to project a conventional deterrent. Mr Ellwood also mentions upcoming NATO summit themes including maintaining deterrence, rapid response force transformation, supporting Ukraine, and global challenges involving China. He recommends clearer mission definition in Ukraine, securing safe havens for grain exports, aiding Ukraine's armaments programme, listing the Wagner militia as terrorists, and welcoming Ukraine into joint expeditionary forces. Mr Ellwood concludes by emphasising the need to increase defence spending amid growing threats such as Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, climate change, resource competition, population growth, and AI weaponisation.

Mr Byrne intervenes by asking Mr Ellwood about the UK's capability to launch a military operation like the Falklands campaign today. He acknowledges the 41st anniversary of the liberation of the Falkland Islands and reflects on how current capabilities compare with those from the past.

The Scottish National party supports the UK Government's interventions, support, and donations to Ukrainian defence forces. However, Dave Doogan criticises the Indo-Pacific tilt in the UK’s defence policy as a rebound from Brexit rather than a strategic necessity. He questions the relevance of the Royal Navy in this theatre given current capabilities like the F-35 programme's reduced order numbers and the state of support ships. He also highlights concerns over nuclear submarine costs, the stretched defence enterprise with ageing platforms and inadequate accommodation for service personnel. Doogan concludes by stating that UK defence policy is in crisis due to underinvestment and rising costs.

Roger Gale announced a time limit of six minutes per speech, indicating the need for efficient contributions as there are many Members seeking to participate in the debate on defence.

Jenkin urges for a new national body to coordinate all forms of power, supported by a strategic mindset and continuous review. He advocates for strengthening the intelligence system, enhancing civil service expertise in defence, and improving flexibility within military forces. Jenkin also stresses on reducing dependence on offshore supply chains and supporting defence-related education.

David highlights the need for a UK military presence globally, particularly in regions like the South China Sea to counter Chinese influence. He supports NATO's role and acknowledges Russia’s threat towards Ukraine. David raises concerns about potential US policy changes under former President Trump and discusses the importance of European allies increasing their defence spending. He notes the value of the UK's enhanced forward presence in Estonia and suggests the need for closer military cooperation with EU allies.

The armed forces are essential to national defence. Chester has long historic links with the military. Despite increasing threats, the Government are still cutting day-to-day MOD spending in real terms, which means less money for troops, housing and families. The Labour party supports UK military support for Ukraine and agrees that future operations will also be fought on the digital battlefield. Microscale disinformation campaigns pose a significant threat to our armed forces and it is vital that we ensure victories on the battlefield are not portrayed as losses by those who wish to undermine our solidarity with allies.

Courts emphasised the significant security challenges facing the UK, particularly in light of peer-on-peer conflict and great power rivalry. He highlighted the need for the Air Force to adapt its training and capabilities, including increasing spares and addressing mass requirements due to expected attrition. He also discussed the importance of dispersing forces to ensure resilience against peer adversaries and addressed concerns about the reliability and capacity of new aircraft like the A400M Atlas compared to legacy systems such as the C-130 Hercules. Courts concluded by stressing the necessity for adequate housing conditions for military personnel, linking their wellbeing directly with operational readiness.

McKinnell paid tribute to UK armed forces and stressed the importance of supporting Ukraine. She highlighted Estonia's strategic significance in NATO, drawing parallels between historical Russian threats and current geopolitical challenges. McKinnell underscored the need for robust defence partnerships, citing Estonia’s steadfastness in defending its independence despite past occupations. She called on the Government to address concerns about meeting NATO obligations and expressed pride in Labour's commitment to NATO operations and bilateral commitments with countries like Estonia.

Thanked the armed forces for their service and emphasised that defence of the island nation must be a top priority. Noted that global operations are set by Government priorities, affordability, and obligations such as NATO. Criticised past Governments for struggling to clarify scope and fund the armed forces properly but praised current Ministers. Highlighted the increasing threat from China and Russia, calling for more funding for planes, ships, and soldiers. Emphasised the need to reverse cuts to the Army and increase defence spending beyond 2% of GDP.

In an intervention, supported Richard Drax's point about the rising global defence expenditure, noting that defence spending is increasing by $200 billion to $700 billion annually.

Emphasised the need for focus in defence priorities amidst rising global threats. Highlighted the necessity of preparing for economic warfare, strengthening capabilities in strategic regions like the Arctic, and expanding soft power through English teaching, BBC World Service enhancements, and increased visa service efficiency.

The Liberal Democrats support the consensus on Ukraine but are concerned about the UK's approach to nuclear deterrence and conventional munitions. They argue against increasing the nuclear stockpile while reducing conventional munitions, expressing concern over industrial signals and transparency in nuclear policy. The speaker also criticises planned cuts to the size of the Army and highlights the morale issues among soldiers regarding these decisions.

The DUP member commends support for Ukraine and emphasises the valuable contributions Northern Ireland can make to defence, including manufacturing capabilities. He calls on the Minister to reverse cuts in combat arms and infantry, highlighting specific examples like Thales's NLAW missile system and shipbuilding contracts awarded to Harland and Wolff. Shannon supports maintaining a nuclear deterrent but asks for details on its future role and impact on budgetary plans.

This has been a serious debate reflecting darkening times and uncertain times. Senior Conservative Back Benchers expressed deep worry over ruthless cuts to defence, the dire procurement process for Ajax vehicles, and the grim state of affairs in defence. The hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex set out a mandate for transformation, while my friend Robert Courts spoke about peer-to-peer conflict being back. Richard Drax made the case against Army cuts. I thanked my colleagues for highlighting defence links and NATO support, including visits to Estonia and Chester's HMS Albion. I acknowledged the delay in the Command Paper and the importance of soft power as highlighted by Liam Byrne. The continuous at-sea deterrent was a key topic, with praise for those serving on submarines and concerns over nuclear submarine recycling. James Sunderland mentioned all-domain warfare, emphasising space and cyber integration. Labour supports UK military support to Ukraine but criticises the lack of a clear plan. We need to reboot defence plans, halt cuts to the Army, meet NATO obligations, and ensure better service life for our forces. Poor accommodation impacts morale and retention; we launched Homes Fit for Heroes to address this issue. At least £15 billion has been wasted on MOD mismanagement since 2010, including recent Defence Secretary's tenure. The future of Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships Wave Ruler and Wave Knight is uncertain due to lack of service personnel.

Acknowledges contributions from various Members, discusses continuous at sea-deterrence and its necessity. Highlights UK’s global influence through military presence in the Indo-Pacific, Turkey, Kenya and partnerships like AUKUS and Global Combat Air Programme. Asserts that defence spending supports values of democracy and peace.

Discussed earlier in the context provided by Andrew Murrison, supporting remarks on Albion's Submarine Service and NATO's importance. Mentioned challenges to UK defence spending.

Suggested continuous at sea-deterrence is a necessary evil, questioning the cost of maintaining it.