Starmer slashes aid to fund biggest increase in defence spending since Cold War
Sir Keir Starmer slashed the aid budget to fund a dramatic increase in defence spending in response to “tyrant” Vladimir Putin and uncertainty over US President Donald Trump’s commitment to European security.
The Prime Minister said spending on defence would rise from its current 2.3% share of the economy to 2.5% in 2027.
That will mean spending £13.4 billion more every year from 2027, something which Sir Keir acknowledged required “extremely difficult and painful choices”.
He said he wanted that figure to reach 3% of gross domestic product during the next parliament.
But to fund it, development assistance aid will be slashed from its current level of 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% in 2027.
Sir Keir said the plan amounted to “the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War”.
Security
Taking spending on the security and intelligence services into account as well as defence, the budget will amount to a 2.6% share of the economy from 2027.
“We must change our national security posture, because a generational challenge requires a generational response,” he said.
“That will demand some extremely difficult and painful choices.
“And through those choices, as hard as they are, we must also seek unity, a whole society effort that will reach into the lives, industries and the homes of the British people.”
Sir Keir will travel to Washington later this week for talks with the US president, who has repeatedly pushed for Europe to increase its defence spending.
Instability
Setting out the need for the UK to respond, the Prime Minister told MPs: “One of the great lessons of our history is that instability in Europe will always wash up on our shores and that tyrants like (Vladimir) Putin only respond to strength.”
He said the UK must stand by Ukraine but “as the nature of that conflict changes, as it has in recent weeks, it brings our response into sharper focus, a new era that we must meet”.
Mr Trump has opened talks with Russian president Mr Putin to end the Ukraine war, putting the transatlantic alliance under severe strain by overriding the concerns of Europe and Kyiv.
The Prime Minister told the Commons: “We must reject any false choice between our allies, between one side of the Atlantic or the other that is against our history, country and party, because it’s against our fundamental national interest.”
The US-UK relationship “survived countless external challenges in the past”.
“So this week, when I meet President Trump, I will be clear I want this relationship to go from strength to strength.”
But Sir Keir, who has been involved in frequent talks with European leaders in recent days, said he would find “new ways to work together” with allies on the continent.
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
Who’d have thought that a Labour PM would slash aid in order to increase military spending? Will this give the most unpopular PM ever a poll boost?
I doubt it he is disliked by those on the left and right of politics.
Get Starmer Out.
It’s the first sensible thing he’s done since taking office.
Well I usually have very little good to say about our sex-confused PM, but this is an excellent move
Ask our wealthiest to pay to protect their pile with a cup of tax rather than swap aid for bombs, you cheap coward, Clark of Kent…
It doesn’t work my friend. The wealthy already pay a huge chunk of the tax receipts. If you tax them more then they either leave, or stop investing, speculating, funding businesses and creating jobs. Look up the Laffer curve and you’ll learn more than our fake economist chancellor will ever take on board.
The Laffer Curve is complete nonsense, Adrian.
And the wealthy don’t invest – but they certainly speculate, but in existing assets, not create new ones. Like top-end housing. Rentiers, all of them.
But I do agree that Rachel from Accounts has no clue.
I bet you still agree with Liz that borrowing huge amounts of cash to give to the super wealthy to stash in offshore bank accounts will still somehow magically increase GDP.
Dyson and Bamford etc could return what Fat Shanks stole for them…
I didn’t notice what aid was being cut.
I wonder if the Brexiteers have worked out that Donny is pushing us to create an EU army.
Not at all. He is asking the European members of NATO, after decades of ignoring the financial requirements of NATO membership, to step up a little bit. The EU will not be involved, other than perhaps in encouraging its members to participate. Ireland and Hungary would torpedo any attempt to establish an EU army and ,even if they stood aside, the EU is not capable of doing anything in a hurry – something like an EU army would take decades to get established. Even if an EU army came into existence before 2050, a military organisation needs to be operationally… Read more »
A defence alliance dominated by EU members is a de facto EU army. The point is that without US support the UK, like all other European states, is not equipped to defend itself so such an alliance is unavoidable.
An alliance is unavoidable and you are right, EU member states will be heavily involved, but that doesn’t make it an EU army any more than NATO is an EU army. The role of the EU itself will be limited to some sort of cheerleader – it is up to the member states to commit to this. I stand by my earlier comments – it will either be a subset of NATO or an expansion of existing European military co-operation arrangements like JEF.
People voted against European cooperation. That’s why we couldn’t join EFTA. That’s why many want to leave the ECHR. It’s why we have 45,000 small boat arrivals instead of being in the Dublin deterrent with other non EU members.
And NATO is finished. The US is no longer a reliable partner. Who knows if any info we send them will auto-forwarded to the highest bidder. We need to replace it with a European Defence Force which can be NATO rebranded less the US.
And it’ll be much cheaper without European forces needing to be ready to defend the US.
Another Labour manifesto commitment gone it wanted to increase aid to 0.6%.
Instead he’s gone with a Reform policy to cut aid.
How is that going down in the socialist circles.
More to the point, how is it going down conservative circles. International aid isn’t charity, it’s global influence which will now be further diminished.
You can’t afford champagne ideals on a beer salary. This country has been living beyond its means for decades and charity begins at home.
What does changing the destination (of the money) do about the balance of payments?
Go on, Adrian! Some of us drink endless champagne, while most of us can barely afford a beer… The ‘UK’ has been mismanaged and under-managed for decades by a succession of conservative governments! Their voting system is a joke as the Single Transferable Party lurches on. It has the means but the wealth has been syphoned off by champagne drinkers! Stupidly ‘investing’ in armaments that cannot be used (anything nuclear, aircraft carriers) without inviting devastating consequences. That just becomes dead money, like the funds ‘resting’ in tax havens, or locked into yachts, private aircraft and other expensive baubles. Charity has… Read more »
surely excess military spending is the definition of the country living beyond its means?
Sadly, I think this is a case of simply having to do it. Russia’s incursion into Ukraine and the recent return of a much more organized and emboldened Trump to the White House in Washington have changed Europe’s situation in a way that can’t really be compared to anything else that has happened since the end of WW2.
Pretty much I think. The US can never be trusted in any venture now.
Trump wants to remove Canada from the 5 eyes sharing. Probably because Canada are wise to the multiple felon and abusers aim and are telling him to get lost.
Now, if you got into bed with Putin, would you expect your ex allies to share info with you?
EU must now be our home, I fear Starmer may be to trusting of trump. Time will tell.
‘EU must now be our home, I fear Starmer may be to trusting of trump. Time will tell.’
That’s pretty much how it seems to me too.
Agree. I’m sure there are a lot of Plaid supporters on here. When faced with a fascist nationalist in Putin’s Russia unfortunately we have to re-arm and with our European allies face him down.
Agree entirely.
Great news for the arms manufacturers but has re-armament ever worked for anyone except their shareholders, Llyn?
“A whole society effort that will reach into the lives, industries and the homes of the British people.”
What does this mean? What sacrifices will Little Sir Keir be asking us all to make, just so the warniks won’t have to admit that their plan to dismember Russia has failed? If he wants me to grow mangelwurzels for victory, I could probably manage that; if he wants me to die for NATO’s credibility, then I must politely decline.
No one plans ‘to dismember Russia’. The reality is that Putin’s ambition is to recreate and restore Russia to the boundaries achieved by the empire of Catherine the Great. That should be no surprise to anyone, because he’s stated precisely that, quite overtly and publicly on numerous occasions. That doesn’t mean that he’s especially interested in restoring Russian hegemony over the whole of eastern Europe, because, despite having been ideologically formed in the dog days of the Soviet era, he’s no communist. He’s just an old-fashioned Russian nationalist and imperialist. He wants to restore Ukraine, the Baltic states, Finland and… Read more »
With this announcement from Cymrophobe Labour PM Keir Starmer now know where the billions due from Wales HS2 consequential, £1 billion + from the Crown Estate, and the £300+ million lost per annum when Whitehall took over responsibility for our EU Structural Funding.
Human life is worth less than human deaths.
So is Starmer going to try and emulate Napoleon and march on Moscow.
That was also tried in WWII and look how that ended.
Who said that was a plan.
you are aware putin has already attacked the uk?
This could easily be the political equivilant of a sleight of hand…the intention being to provoke a public outrage so that Starmer el al can employ some fancy footwork to soften up public opinion into accepting large cuts to welfare spending along with tax increases as the alternative to fund his policy.
The IFS has said Starmer is fudging figures 0.2% of GDP is £6bn. Well I never would have thought PM being economical.
Presumably he’s just added the new extra money to the increases already planned.
Can’t they just make efficiency savings, to achieve the same outcomes with 2.3% spending as they would with 2.5%?
Why is it that only in military spending is spending money an end in itself? Unless the real purpose is simply to subsidise the arms industry?