Starmer moves to ramp up Britain's defences as ministers go to war over costs
The UK's nuclear warhead programme will also be bolstered, with Defence Secretary John Healey yesterday saying the deterrent is 'what Putin fears most'.
5
5
PM Sir Keir Starmer will today point to increasing global tensions as he publishes the long-awaited Strategic Defence Review.
It will involve 'moving to war-fighting readiness' by ramping up munitions, buying 7,000 long-range weapons and creating a new cyber command centre.
But the blueprint has been embroiled in a Cabinet row over money amid fears Chancellor Rachel Reeves might not fund the promised three per cent of GDP on defence by 2034.
The PM will say on a trip to Scotland: 'From the supply lines to the front lines, this Government is four-square behind the men and women upholding our freedom and security.'
Up to 12 nuclear-powered subs will be built under the AUKUS security partnership with the US and Australia.
They are conventionally-armed with Tomahawk missiles and are mainly used as intelligence gatherers, lurking off hostile coastlines to intercept communications.
They can also deploy special forces and drones.
Sir Keir will say a separate £15billion nuclear warheads boost will guarantee the UK's continuous at-sea deterrent until 2030 and protect 9,000 jobs.
Mr Healey told the BBC yesterday: 'Our nuclear deterrent has been the ultimate guarantee of security in this country.
"It's what Putin fears most.
'And we are the only nation in Nato that commits our nuclear deterrent, in full, to the defence of other Nato allies.'
The Strategic Defence Review — carried out by ex-Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson — makes 62 recommendations.
But a dust-up is brewing after Labour said the three per cent funding promise was a mere 'ambition' if the economy allowed.
Mr Healey appeared to try to bounce Ms Reeves into coughing up by saying: 'I have no doubt that we'll hit that ambition during the next Parliament.'
5
Yet he noticeably did not say, when pressed, if he had cast-iron assurances.
Tories want the target hit before the next election.
Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge said: 'John Healey has been hung out to dry by Rachel Reeves.
"As recently as Thursday, Healey promised that defence spending would definitely hit three per cent, but today he's completely backtracked.'
Labour also appear to be welching on pledges to reverse the 10,000 cut to troop numbers under the Tories.
Mr Healey admitted it would only come in the 'next Parliament'.
He added: 'We've still got more people leaving than joining. The first job is to reverse that trend.'
It had been reported he had hoped to secure £2.5billion to increase troop numbers to 76,000.
5
5
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
4 minutes ago
- BBC News
Kemi Badenoch: I don't identify as Nigerian any more
Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch has said she no longer identifies as Nigerian and has not renewed her passport since the early who was born in the UK, grew up in both Nigeria and the US. She returned to England aged 16 because of Nigeria's worsening political and economic climate, and to continue her on former MP and television presenter Gyles Brandreth's Rosebud podcast, she said she was "Nigerian through ancestry" though "by identity, I'm not really".Last year, Badenoch faced criticism from Nigeria's vice president who said she had "denigrated" the West African country. Badenoch, who lived in Lagos, spoke at length about her upbringing on the podcast. "I know the country very well, I have a lot of family there, and I'm very interested in what happens there. But home is where my now family is."On not renewing her passport, she said: "I don't identify with it any more, most of my life has been in the UK and I've just never felt the need to.""I'm Nigerian through ancestry, by birth, despite not being born there because of my parents... but by identity I'm not really," she added. Badenoch said when she visited the country when her father died she had to get a visa, which was "a big fandango".She said her early experiences in Nigeria shaped her political outlook, including "why I don't like socialism".As a child "I remember never quite feeling that I belonged there", she went on, saying she recalled "coming back to the UK in 1996 thinking this is home".At the end of last year, Badenoch was criticised for saying she had grown up in fear and insecurity in Nigeria, which was plagued by corruption. The country's vice president Kashim Shettima responded, saying his government was "proud" of Badenoch "in spite of her efforts at denigrating her nation of origin". A spokesperson for Badenoch rebuffed the criticism.
The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Heathrow's third runway plan is wrong – and not just because of noise and pollution
Here we go again. To say there is a deja vu aspect to the latest proposal to build Heathrow's third runway is an understatement. For reasons that are not clear, Sir Keir Starmer has determined the airport's expansion to be a key plank in the government's economic growth strategy. Seemingly, he did not take into account the issues that grounded the plans in the past, as far back as 1968 – namely, Heathrow's unfortunate and unavoidable proximity to the M25, the rivers and their valleys that cross that part of west London, the additional noise pollution, and the need for improved and costly transport links to and from the centre of the capital that will result from the vast uplift in passengers. On the constant sound from the increased number of planes landing and taking off, the prime minister will insist that great technological strides have been made in curbing the din. It is true that new aircraft are less noisy. However, they are still extremely audible, there will be more of them, and they will be flying over a heavily residential area. As for the rest, nothing has altered fundamentally, environmentally and logistically, since Heathrow last submitted a scheme, pre-Covid. Inflation means the bill is now an eye-watering £49bn. The bill, ultimately, will be borne by the air passenger, and Heathrow is already the most expensive airport in the world. Will the airlines and their customers stomach at least a doubling in charges? There is the thorny problem, too, of public transport to and from London. The London mayor will be expected to find a way to enable an extra 60 million people a year to use Heathrow. Transport for London is strapped for cash, struggling to upgrade the Tube network. How the additional demand will be met is not clear. What has shifted as well is the nature of air travel. Post-pandemic, business travel is down and looks unlikely to recover – that, certainly, is what the industry is saying. During the outbreak, holding meetings remotely came into its own and employers took a hard look at their budgets – Zoom or Teams often represent a better alternative in executive time and expense. That therefore raises a major doubt about one of the main claims made for Heathrow's extension. It is said to be necessary to enhance London and the UK's standing in the business world, but how, if the commercial users are not there? There has been movement too, and not of the positive kind, in attitude towards Heathrow the operator. The power outage that shut down the plum in Starmer's vision for resurgence and global acclaim was a shocking episode; it not only highlighted a neglected infrastructure but also a failure of management. Thomas Woldbye, who is seeking permission to build this national project, is the same boss who slept through the night as Britain's busiest airport ceased to function. Heathrow's reputation in the sector was already poor, but this took it to a new low. Woldbye has an idea that is different from the one previously suggested, which is to build the third runway over the M25, taking the motorway underneath – and all without any disruption to road users. This is fanciful even without a track record that hardly inspires confidence. Which raises another question. Why? Why should Heathrow as a company get to preside over the airport's improvement and reap the benefits? If we're all agreed that it is a vital national asset, holding a pivotal place in the economy, then why should the incumbent be in charge, not to mention entrusted, with its development? Those who wax lyrical about Heathrow's importance like to reminisce about how Britain led the transformation of international aviation. Boosting the airport is seen as completing that journey. It is the case that we once did. That was in the Margaret Thatcher era, when British Airways was freed from the shackles of state ownership. Thatcher did more than that, though. She enabled and encouraged competition, giving a steer to the challengers and disruptors, notably to Richard Branson at Virgin and Michael Bishop at British Midland. The newly privatised BA was forced to raise its game, and together, these three set new standards. There appears to be an assumption that Woldbye's company must be given the job. But there is another option. Surinder Arora, the self-made billionaire who has masterminded the building of leading hotels at Heathrow and other airports and is a substantial Heathrow landowner, has his own remedy. His is much cheaper, envisaging a shorter runway that does not affect the M25. It is easy to dismiss Arora. But he is popular with the airlines, he rails rightly against Heathrow's pricing, and he knows a thing or two about customer service. He also possesses heavyweight advisers in the shape of Bechtel, the US engineering, construction and project management giant. He deserves to be taken seriously. Heathrow needs a competitor. Likewise, if neither the airport operator nor Arora is selected and the third runway is again kiboshed, then surely serious thought must be given to expanding rival airports. Heathrow has been resting on its laurels for too long. As for Starmer, he perhaps should ask himself how it is that someone who professes to be forensic legally is so capable of displaying rushes of blood to the head politically. Giving Heathrow such prominence smacks of impetuousness. He's done it and has been left with an almighty headache.
The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer needs to listen to us, says Labour MP who quit government over welfare cuts
Sir Keir Starmer needs to listen to his own MPs, an ex-Labour frontbencher who quit her role over plans to slash benefits has said. Vicky Foxcroft, who dramatically quit as a government whip in June, said ministers need to 'properly engage' with Labour backbenchers after a massive rebellion forced the government to abandon key aspects of its benefits reforms. Ms Foxcroft said she was 'really concerned' about the negative impact the proposals – which were later abandoned – would have on disabled people. 'There was some quite bad cuts to disabled people's benefits suggested, particularly around Personal Independence Payment (PIP), and having to have four points before you would be able to access the benefit. 'And I was just really concerned about that. And, you know, at that point, I didn't feel that I could support it and didn't feel that I could go out and whip for it and get other MPs to do the same', Ms Foxcroft told GB News ' Gloria De Piero. She said she had 'sleepless nights' in the lead-up to her decision to resign, saying it was 'really difficult and I really would rather not have had to do that'. 'I was actually having a hard personal time at that time as well, with my dad passing away quite suddenly. And so, you know, I had the stress of all of that, but also I was really worried about these proposals, and I really spoke to lots of people about what my concerns were around it. 'I had some sleepless nights, it plays on your mind the whole time', the MP for Lewisham North added. Asked what the government could do differently next time, she said: 'I think it's really important to listen to MPs. MPs are out in their constituencies. They're meeting with people. You know, when they're raising concerns it is coming from what people are worried about. 'It's really important that that engagement takes place in the future. And properly takes place.' But Ms Foxcroft also insisted that the government can turn around its fortunes, despite a poor performance in the polls, with Reform UK surging ahead. 'We've got quite a few years until a general election, and we are doing a lot of good things in Parliament, the Renters' Rights Bill, the Employment Rights Bill, the Football Governance Bill, but at the moment, some of this stuff is just bills in parliament. 'What we need is people to really feel the difference actually, genuinely in their lives.' It comes amid growing concern over the direction of Sir Keir's government from voters on both the left and the right, with the prime minister's approval rating hitting an all time low earlier this month. His support among the public reached new depths of minus 43 after the £5bn welfare U-turn, according to polling published last month. The survey, first reported by The Sunday Times, also found that just a year after coming to power, seven in 10 voters think Sir Keir's government is at least as chaotic as the Tories' previous term.
