UK Chancellor Faces £11 Billion Defence Spending Gap, Critics Allege
Critics argue Chancellor John Healey's budget fails to outline a clear plan for increasing defense spending to meet future NATO targets, potentially leaving an £11 billion shortfall.
Chancellor John Healey is facing criticism over his defense spending commitments, with reports of an £11 billion gap in his plans. Healey pledged to increase defense spending to 3 percent of GDP by 2030 and to reach a NATO target of 3.5 percent by 2035. However, he has not yet detailed how these goals will be achieved, leading to accusations that he is delaying the announcement of concrete plans.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimates that meeting the 2030 target would require an additional £11 billion, while the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) projects the 2035 ambition would cost £35 billion. Helen Miller, director of the IFS, expressed skepticism about the feasibility of Healey's plans, noting that past Chancellors have often failed to deliver on ambitious future spending commitments.
Despite the scrutiny, Healey defended his budget, stating, "I make absolutely no apologies. If we can take some steps that might help around the margins, we will do that." However, some within his own party have voiced strong concerns. Admiral Lord West, a Labour peer and former Royal Navy chief, accused Healey of "betraying" the armed forces by deferring decisions on spending increases. This criticism follows a warning from Defence Secretary Wes Streeting that the nation has limited time to prepare for potential conflict.
Healey himself resigned as Defence Secretary in June over disagreements regarding military funding. At that time, he suggested that spending 3 percent on defense was essential for national security. The shadow defense secretary, James Cartlidge, echoed concerns about a "massive black hole" in defense spending, labeling it a potential broken promise by Labour.
An IFS official further warned that significant cuts would be necessary elsewhere in government to accommodate Healey's defense spending ambitions. Miller also expressed disapproval of plans to use capital reserves to address a £4.7 billion shortfall in the Defence Investment Plan, stating that such reserves are not intended for this purpose.
Conservative shadow chancellor Andrew Griffith accused Healey of "ducking" critical decisions on military spending, arguing that such inaction makes the country less secure. He likened the government's approach to "closing their eyes" while facing fiscal challenges.