Defence spending fails to account for spiralling cost of nuclear deterrent

Telegraph

20-06-2025

Defence spending failed to account for the spiralling cost of Britain's nuclear deterrent, MPs have said.
A report by the public accounts committee into the Ministry of Defence's spending plans has found that the rising costs of maintaining the nuclear deterrent and submarines risk squeezing budgets for 'conventional capabilities'.
It comes after the Government recently published its strategic defence review (SDR), which aimed to show how the Armed Forces will adapt to future battlefields.
It committed to renewing the nuclear deterrent while also spending £40 billion on new equipment for the Army and investing in a sixth-generation fighter.
However, the committee's report called on the Government to be transparent regarding the 'specific cost details in the specific area of nuclear'.
It called for the MoD to publish an equipment plan, which it said should provide a 'window' into the department's spending but has not been published since 2023.
The report authors also said that they wanted 'to be assured on the risk of funding not being sucked away from other vital areas earmarked for growth in the SDR'.
'The Defence Nuclear Enterprise (DNE) remains a cornerstone of the UK's defence strategy,' it said.
'However, its cost continues to rise, and there is a risk that these increases will squeeze the budgets for conventional capabilities.'
The report states that the nuclear budget was £10.9 billion, around 18 per cent of the whole defence budget in 2024-25.
But forecast costs for the DNE for the 10 years from 2023 until 2033 have increased to approximately £128 billion, up from the £117.8 billion reported in the National Audit Offices's 2023 equipment plan report.
'The prioritisation of the DNE has led to government creating a ring-fence which prevents the department from using elsewhere money allocated to delivering the DNE, but which allows money to flow the other way,' the report said.
'The department recognises that one of the big capability questions it must answer through the SDR and its follow-on work is the balance of investment between nuclear and conventional capabilities. However, it has not yet worked this through.'
It added: 'The increase in nuclear costs may restrict the money available for other important needs.'
The report suggests such other 'important needs' range from improving poor accommodation for troops and addressing the military's retention and recruitment crisis.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chairman of the committee, said: 'In the context of continuing geopolitical uncertainty, this continued delay in providing figures for public scrutiny is a truly unacceptable state of affairs.
'This committee has made a number of recommendations to government to offer it another chance to cooperate.
'There is also a material risk of the costs of the nuclear deterrent beginning to act as a ratchet mechanism.
'As well as a fully worked-up picture of equipment overall, we require specific cost details in the specific area of nuclear, to be assured on the risk of funding not being sucked away from other vital areas earmarked for growth in the SDR.'
He added: 'If government does not come forward with the requisite details very soon, Parliament will be unable to critically assess the underpinnings of the SDR, and it will remain to be seen how the public can thereby ascertain whether what is planned, including the pledge of 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence spending, is deliverable.
'The MoD can, however, be rightfully proud of the role it has played in supporting Ukraine in resisting Russia's brutal invasion.
'The adaptability and responsiveness of government in constantly innovating both in the assistance provided and in its own processes has been truly commendable, and this committee thanks all involved for their continuing efforts.'