Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

European Rearmament Fund

Monday 19 May 2025 · 1 question

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • UK is hosting a summit in London to reset its relationship with Europe.
  • The summit aims to explore closer collaboration in defence industrial initiatives.
  • Discussions include supporting economic growth and jobs on both sides.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Johanna Baxter Lab Paisley and Renfrewshire South
Context

The UK is hosting a summit in London to reset its relationship with Europe, aiming to restore its reputation as a global power after a decade of perceived Tory incompetence. This Labour Government seeks to support economic growth and job creation within the defence industry.

Question

I am pleased that today the United Kingdom is hosting a summit in London to reset our relationship with Europe—yet another sign that this Labour Government are restoring our reputation as a global power after it was trashed by a decade of Tory incompetence. Will my right hon. Friend outline what steps are being taken to ensure that our world-leading defence industry can access the European rearmament fund, to drive economic prosperity at home, benefit my constituents, and strengthen security across Europe?

Answer from The Minister for Defence Procurement and Industry (Maria Eagle)

The UK and the EU will use this opportunity to explore closer collaboration across defence industrial initiatives in a way that will support economic growth and jobs on both sides, and help to prevent fragmentation across our shared industrial base. We can now go on to discuss a bilateral agreement to facilitate participation in EU schemes such as ReArm and SAFE—Security Action for Europe.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The financial commitment required by the UK to participate in the fund was not specified.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email