Sir Keir Starmer is under pressure to quickly lift defence spending to 2.5% of GDP or face new military cuts this year – even as he considers deploying troops to Ukraine, Sky News understands.
Defence sources said such an increase – which would amount to about an extra £5bn annually – is still far short of what is required to rebuild and transform the armed forces, stressing that an ultimate hike to at least 3% of national income would be necessary.
But the sources said a rapid rise in investment to the government’s promised target of 2.5% of GDP, from 2.3% at present, should prevent new swingeing reductions in capabilities – just as Donald Trump orders European militaries to be stronger.
“The truth is there needs to be more money now or else prepare for further cuts,” said one military insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
A second defence source said: “We know the government is in a difficult financial position. But getting to 2.5% sooner rather than later would be enormously beneficial for their relationship with the new US administration, and the UK’s leadership role within NATO.”
The prime minister has pledged to set a path to investing 2.5% of GDP on defence but he has yet to say when this commitment will be announced, let alone by what date the target will be met.
Defence sources said they believe the Treasury wants to push the timeline out to the very end of this parliament – a delay that would leave the armed forces to “wither on the vine”.
More on Military
Related Topics:
“It is just not serious,” said a third defence source, sounding exasperated.
The UK position on defence spending came into sharp focus last week as European allies reeled from a barrage of criticism by the new Trump administration for their over-reliance on the US to defend Europe and support Ukraine.
Britain – a nuclear power – presents itself as the strongest European military within the NATO alliance and boasts of a special relationship with the US.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer has said he is ‘ready and willing’ to put UK troops on the ground in Ukraine to enforce any peace deal. Pic: PA
Yet, Sir Keir has stuck with his 2.5% target even as Mr Trump calls on allies to boost defence expenditure to 5% and take on a much greater responsibility for security in Europe.
Mark Rutte, the secretary general of NATO, says the goal for all 32 allies should be “north of 3%”.
The reality of Europe’s weakness on defence has been brutally exposed by Mr Trump’s approach to ending Russia’s war in Ukraine, with the president sidelining the UK, the Europeans and Kyiv.
But, given the hollowed-out state of the UK armed forces, an announcement by the prime minister that he was considering sending British soldiers to Ukraine to help secure the peace as part of any ceasefire deal raised eyebrows within defence circles.
One insider questioned how Mr Starmer could propose such a challenging deployment without explaining how he was going to fill the army’s gaping gaps in weapons and manpower.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said any international security force of British and other foreign troops would need to be about 110,000-strong.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:13
Zelenskyy warns of Russian army ‘danger’ to Europe
The UK would struggle to sustain a deployment of several thousand soldiers for any enduring length of time and would have to give up other commitments, such as a battlegroup of around 900 military personnel based in Estonia on a NATO mission to deter Russian aggression.
With defence matters in focus, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, the head of the armed forces, and his fellow chiefs met with Sir Keir on Friday to talk to him about military capabilities.
It is highly unusual for such a meeting to take place and signals a desire by the prime minister to understand the thinking of his top brass.
The meeting came as an external team of experts, led by Lord Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary and former secretary general of NATO, was putting the finishing touches to a sweeping review of defence that the government has said will be published this spring.
The reviewers were tasked with setting out how to transform the army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force to meet future threats, but their ability to deliver has been constrained from the start by Downing Street saying this must be achieved within a defence spending target of 2.5% of GDP.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:23
Europe faces new reality
A government spokesperson said any suggestion the prime minister was considering raising defence spending beyond 2.5% “is purely speculation”.
The spokesperson said: “The Strategic Defence Review is wide-ranging, ensuring we look hard at the threats we face and the capabilities we need to meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. As we have consistently said, the review will be published in the spring.
“To ensure the UK is prepared to deal with the changing threat, our budget increased defence spending by £2.9bn for next year and we are committed to setting a path to 2.5% of GDP on defence.”
Building society chiefs will this week intensify their protests against the chancellor’s plans to cut cash ISA limits by warning that it will push up borrowing costs for homeowners and businesses.
Sky News has obtained the draft of a letter being circulated by the Building Societies Association (BSA) among its members which will demand that Rachel Reeves abandons a proposed move to slash savers’ annual cash ISA allowance from the existing £20,000 threshold.
The draft letter, which is expected to be published this week, warns the chancellor that her decision would deter savers, disrupt Labour’s housebuilding ambitions and potentially present an obstacle to economic growth by triggering higher funding costs.
“Cash ISAs are a cornerstone of personal savings for millions across the UK, helping people from all walks of life to build financial resilience and achieve their savings goals,” the draft letter said.
“Beyond their personal benefits, Cash ISAs play a vital role in the broader economy.
“The funds deposited in these accounts support lending, helping to keep mortgages and loans affordable and accessible.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
“Cutting Cash ISA limits would make this funding more scarce which would have the knock-on effect of making loans to households and businesses more expensive and harder to come by.
“This would undermine efforts to stimulate economic growth, including the government’s commitment to delivering 1.5 million new homes.
“Cutting the Cash ISA limit would send a discouraging message to savers, who are sensibly trying to plan for the future and undermine a product that has stood the test of time.”
The chancellor is reportedly preparing to announce a review of cash ISA limits as part of her Mansion House speech next week.
While individual building society bosses have come out publicly to express their opposition to the move, the BSA letter is likely to be viewed with concern by Treasury officials.
The Nationwide is by far Britain’s biggest building society, with the likes of the Coventry, Yorkshire and Skipton also ranking among the sector’s largest players.
In the draft letter, which is likely to be signed by dozens of building society bosses, the BSA said the chancellor’s proposals “would make the whole ISA regime more complex and make it harder for people to transfer money between cash and investments”.
“Restricting Cash ISAs won’t encourage people to invest, as it won’t suddenly change their appetite to take on risk,” it said.
“We know that barriers to investing are primarily behavioural, therefore building confidence and awareness are far more important.”
The BSA called on Ms Reeves to back “a long-term consumer awareness and information campaign to educate people about the benefits of investing, alongside maintaining strong support for saving”.
“We therefore urge you to affirm your support for Cash ISAs by maintaining the current £20,000 limit.
“Preserving this threshold will enable households to continue building financial security while supporting broader economic stability and growth.”
The BSA declined to comment on Monday on the leaked letter, although one source said the final version was subject to revision.
The Treasury has so far refused to comment on its plans.
The government has declined to rule out a “wealth tax” after former Labour leader Neil Kinnock called for one to help the UK’s dwindling finances.
Lord Kinnock, who was leader from 1983 to 1992, told Sky News’ Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that imposing a 2% tax on assets valued above £10 million would bring in up to £11 billion a year.
On Monday, Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesperson would not say if the government will or will not bring in a specific tax for the wealthiest.
Asked multiple times if the government will do so, he said: “The government is committed to the wealthiest in society paying their share in tax.
“The prime minister has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden.”
He added the government has closed loopholes for non-doms, placed taxes on private jets and said the 1% wealthiest people in the UK pay one third of taxes.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves earlier this year insisted she would not impose a wealth tax in her autumn budget, something she also said in 2023 ahead of Labour winning the election last year.
Asked if her position has changed, Sir Keir’s spokesman referred back to her previous comments and said: “The government position is what I have said it is.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:31
Welfare: ‘Didn’t get process right’ – PM
The previous day, Lord Kinnock told Sky News: “It’s not going to pay the bills, but that kind of levy does two things.
“One is to secure resources, which is very important in revenues.
“But the second thing it does is to say to the country, ‘we are the government of equity’.
“This is a country which is very substantially fed up with the fact that whatever happens in the world, whatever happens in the UK, the same interests come out on top unscathed all the time while everybody else is paying more for getting services.
“Now, I think that a gesture or a substantial gesture in the direction of equity fairness would make a big difference.”
The son of a coal miner, who became a member of the House of Lords in 2005, the Labour peer said asset values have “gone through the roof” in the past 20 years while economies and incomes have stagnated in real terms.
In reference to Chancellor Rachel Reeves refusing to change her fiscal rules, he said the government is giving the appearance it is “bogged down by their own imposed limitations”, which he said is “not actually the accurate picture”.
A wealth tax would help the government get out of that situation and would be backed by the “great majority of the general public”, he added.
His comments came after a bruising week for Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who had to heavily water down a welfare bill meant to save £5.5bn after dozens of Labour MPs threatened to vote against it.
With those savings lost – and a previous U-turn on cutting winter fuel payments also reducing savings – the chancellor’s £9.9bn fiscal headroom has quickly dwindled.
In a hint of what could come, government minister Stephen Morgan told Wilfred Frost on Sky News Breakfast: “I hold dear the Labour values of making sure those that have the broadest shoulders pay, pay more tax.
“I think that’s absolutely right.”
He added that the government has already put a tax on private jets and on the profits of energy companies.