Calls for a significant revamp of the integrated defence review to focus primarily on state-on-state conflict. Emphasises the need for ideological change, greater engagement with the defence industry, and increased financial commitment from the Government.

Intervenes to highlight that Ukraine's resistance demonstrates the importance of reversing decisions such as scrapping 2nd Battalion the Mercian Regiment, which proved its worth in 2009.

Points out a long-standing political decision to reduce UK defence capacity and criticises off-shore procurement decisions such as giving a £10 million contract for naval vehicles to a Dutch company instead of British industry.

Defends the new partnership with British industry under the Defence Security Industrial Strategy and asserts that discussions have been forward-looking.

Mercer discussed the mindset towards defence, arguing that investments should prioritise personnel over capital expenditure. He mentioned improvements in procurement but highlighted a decline in investment over about 50 years and noted recent small increases in capital departmental expenditure limits (CDEL). Mercer warned against focusing solely on technology, as this could degrade defence capability.

Syms agreed with Mercer's point that a smaller military would find it more difficult to train nations such as Ukraine in defending their sovereignty.

Stewart, while acknowledging his bias towards the Mercian Regiment, argued for the importance of infantry battalions and urged the Minister to stop planned cuts so that we keep our infantry. He emphasised the value of basic infantry roles in modern warfare.

Tugendhat agreed with Mercer, arguing that there are no votes in defeat and stressed the importance of defence against potential adversaries. He highlighted the risk of finding out we are uninsured when it comes to military preparedness.

Francois, deferring to Mercer's operational service in Afghanistan, argued that while high technology is necessary, trained personnel who can use it are equally important. He cited examples of successful military operations conducted by less technologically advanced forces.

Mangnall asked Mercer about the issue of retention in the military across all services and urged for solutions to address this problem.

Mr Grant expressed concern over the inefficiency and mismanagement of the Ministry of Defence's spending, citing reports from the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee. He emphasised that asking hard questions about defence spending is not disloyal but rather a responsibility to ask about issues affecting service personnel who cannot speak out publicly. Mr Grant highlighted significant budget overruns in major equipment contracts such as Astute-class attack submarines and Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, stressing the importance of addressing poor accommodation for armed forces personnel with additional funding that often fails to resolve underlying issues. He also questioned the affordability of the equipment plan due to potential financial risks and savings not materializing, suggesting a need for a comprehensive review of MOD's financial management.

Intervenes to clarify that Ukraine was not entitled to retain the inherited nuclear arsenal as a successor state under international law.

Intervenes, agreeing with Mr Lewis and criticising the decision to reduce conventional military capabilities, emphasising the need for boots on the ground in territorial conflicts.

Jamie Stone highlighted the importance of unity among MPs regarding armed forces support while also pointing out issues such as the underutilisation of Type 45 destroyers due to engine repairs. He advocated for expediting their re-engining or repair by highlighting his grandfather's naval service during a time when Britain had the world's largest navy. Stone emphasised the need for state-of-the-art warships and suggested that if building a national flagship were necessary, it should be made as a Type 31 frigate rather than another type of ship. He also stressed the importance of maintaining adequate army numbers to ensure credibility with potential adversaries and attract the best recruits.

Jim Shannon agreed with Jamie Stone's comments about the need for sufficient British Army numbers, referencing the ability to recruit above average numbers in Northern Ireland. He questioned whether extra recruitment should be set aside specifically for Northern Ireland.

John Howell noted the positive aspect of the UK being the largest European NATO spender but also acknowledged concerns regarding cuts to the British Army.

We need to address how the UK ended up with its smallest Army due to political choices, not an imaginary £38 billion black hole. The 2010 Conservative-led Government cut defence budgets by 16%, affecting personnel and morale. Current rhetoric about a large cash injection is misleading; the budget will still be lower than in 2010. Defence spending should be used to strengthen UK industry and job creation, with evidence of inefficiencies within MOD. The nuclear deterrent remains crucial but must stay on track financially and tactically. We need proper investment in personnel for effective defence.

Highlights the need for increased defence spending to maintain a strong military presence within NATO but also independently. Emphasises the importance of personnel and equipment, citing Ukraine's current situation as an example. Calls for a move towards 3% GDP allocation for defence.

Discusses recruitment success in the Army compared to other services, outflow and retention issues, housing problems for armed forces personnel, and the potential use of international development funds through the Ministry of Defence for humanitarian missions.

Announces a reduction in speaking time to five minutes due to limited remaining debate time.

Expressed concern about current military readiness and the impact of hollowing out battalions due to cap badge politics. Emphasised the importance of retaining capabilities such as tanks for offensive operations despite changes in warfare, and highlighted the need for proper facilities for special forces.

Highlighted the context of current defence debates against the backdrop of events unfolding in Europe. Critiqued the 2% NATO spending pledge, arguing that it includes a broader range of expenses beyond direct military expenditure, which may not provide sufficient security for the UK. Urged re-evaluation of assumptions made in the integrated review and called for reconsideration of reducing Army personnel.

We need to spend more on defence due to the current global situation, focusing on the economic impact of sanctions against Russia. The procurement process for military equipment needs acceleration, particularly regarding the medium-lift helicopter requirement.

The UK must address its incompetent defence procurement system, exemplified by failures like the Ajax programme. The MOD's financial plans are unrealistic, with underfunded projects and proposed cuts without a clear plan. Scotland needs better military presence and investment in personnel housing.

Made a point of order regarding the Russian artillery strike on a maternity hospital in Mariupol.

Responded to the point of order by stating that it is not a matter for the Chair but acknowledged the tragedy and put it on the record.

Thanked the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford for raising the point of order and condemned the Russian action alongside the Prime Minister. He expressed support for his colleague’s opening arguments and highlighted the importance of managing MOD spending in light of Russia's invasion. Evans called on the Government to increase defence spending similar to other European allies, such as Germany and Denmark. He emphasised that any increase should benefit the UK economy through increased apprenticeships and SME growth, but warned against mismanagement which could damage the domestic sector. Evans also raised concerns about MOD waste and inefficiencies, citing figures from the National Audit Office and Public Accounts Committee, urging for an audit to address these issues.

Minister Jeremy Quin acknowledged the debate's focus on the UK’s defence spending and its commitment to NATO. He praised Prime Minister Boris Johnson's leadership during difficult times, stressing the need for a forward-leaning and agile armed forces due to new threats arising from Russia and states violating international law. He detailed recent investments in the military budget, including an £24 billion increase over four years, taking the annual defence budget to more than £47 billion for 2022-23.

Asked for an urgent review of operational availability of all equipment and suggested issuing urgent operational requirements if necessary, particularly regarding Type 45 ships.

Emphasised the need to spend more on defence, up to 3%, and reverse cuts to the infantry. Declared interest as an ex-Mercian Regiment officer.