John Healey’s defence spending U-turn ‘speaks volumes’ about Labour's priorities, armed forces expert slams

Thank you for subscribing!

'The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) as an entity, as a body, simply don’t care. It is as simple as that,' Rob Clarke said

John Healey’s apparent U-turn on defence spending “speaks volumes” about Labour’s priorities, an armed forces expert has warned.

Speaking to GB News, Research Director Rob Clarke of the 878 Institute reacted to concerns that the Chancellor has abandoned his convictions on fully funding Britain’s armed forces.

In June, Mr Healey resigned as Defence Secretary in protest over the Treasury's failure to provide the cash needed to meet the UK’s security commitments.

In his resignation letter, Mr Healey said then-Prime Minister Keir Starmer had been unable, and then-Chancellor Rachel Reeves was “unwilling”, to commit the resources required to defend the country.

He argued that the plans then on the table would take defence spending from around 2.6 per cent of GDP to just 2.68 per cent by 2030, rather than hitting three per cent.

Mr Healey had called for a firm “headmark date” for reaching three per cent of GDP on defence in 2030.

Just two months later and now serving as Chancellor under Andy Burnham, Mr Healey appears set to shelve his previous target.

The Chancellor is said to have deferred the increase until next year’s spending review, with defence spending currently projected to reach around 2.7 per cent of GDP by 2030.

Mr Clarke said it was “very disappointing” to see Mr Healey renege on the apparent catalyst for his principled resignation as Defence Secretary.

“I think it’s very disappointing considering his rhetoric only three months ago he resigned on a point of principle,” he said.

“That principle now seems like it’s no longer a fact to play.”

The defence expert said Mr Healey had first-hand experience of the Treasury’s resistance to increasing security spending.

“I think it’s very disturbing that this is happening only weeks into the new Burnham administration. We have another two and a half years of this at least.”

“The Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) as an entity, as a body, simply don’t care. It is as simple as that.”

He acknowledged that some Labour MPs did take defence and national security seriously, but said they were in a minority.

“There’s a couple of really good backbench Labour MPs,” he said, naming Fred Thomas and Al Carns as politicians who “really understand the threat”.

“But the PLP, the Parliamentary Labour Party as an entity, as a body simply don’t care.”

“We see day in, day out threats of Russian sabotage, espionage, assassination attempts,” he said.

“Labour parliamentarians get briefed on this regularly. So there is no lack of understanding. It’s like they do not care.”

“I would encourage them to attend more briefings, go to more Defence Select Committee inquiries, and actually take this a lot more seriously. Because this is coming down the road very, very fast,” Mr Clarke said.