The UK will be forced to agree this month to increase defence spending to 3.5% of national income within a decade as part of a NATO push to rearm and keep the US on side, Sky News understands.
The certainty of a major policy shift means there is bemusement in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) about why Sir Keir Starmer‘s government has tied itself in knots over whether to describe an earlier plan to hit 3% of GDP by the 2030s as an ambition or a commitment, when it is about to change.
The problem is seen as political, with the prime minister needing to balance warfare against welfare – more money for bombs and bullets or for winter fuel payments and childcare.
Image: Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer during a visit to a military base training Ukrainian troops in April. File pic: PA
Sir Keir is due to hold a discussion to decide on the defence spending target as early as today, it is understood.
As well as a rise in pure defence spending of 3.5% by 2035, he will also likely be forced to commit a further 1.5% of GDP to defence-related areas such as spy agencies and infrastructure. Militaries need roads, railway networks, and airports to deploy at speed.
This would bolster total broader defence spending to 5% – a target Mark Rutte, the head of NATO, wants all allies to sign up to at a major summit in the Netherlands later this month.
It is being referred to as the “Hague investment plan”.
Asked what would happen at the summit, a defence source said: “3.5% without a doubt.”
Yet the prime minister reiterated the 3% ambition when he published a major defence review on Monday that placed “NATO first” at the heart of UK defence policy.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:46
What’s in the UK Strategic Defence Review?
The defence source said: “How can you have a defence review that says NATO first” and then be among the last of the alliance’s 32 member states – along with countries like Spain – to back this new goal?
Unlike Madrid, London presents itself as the leading European nation in the alliance.
A British commander is always the deputy supreme allied commander in Europe – the second most senior operational military officer – under an American commander, while the UK’s nuclear weapons are committed to defending the whole of NATO.
Even Germany, which has a track record of weak defence spending despite boasting the largest economy, has recently signalled it plans to move investment towards the 5% level, while Canada, also previously feeble, is making similar noises.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:37
Is the UK battle ready?
The source signalled it was inconceivable the UK would not follow suit and said officials across Whitehall understand the spending target will rise to 3.5%.
The source said it would be met by 2035, so three years later than the timeline Mr Rutte has proposed.
Defence spending is currently at 2.3%.
A second defence source said the UK has to commit to this spending target, “or else we can no longer call ourselves a leader within NATO”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Sky News’s political editor Beth Rigby challenged the prime minister on the discrepancy between his spending ambitions and those of his allies at a press conference on Monday.
Sir Keir seemed to hint change might be coming.
“Of course, there are discussions about what the contribution should be going into the NATO conference in two or three weeks’ time,” he said.
“But that conference is much more about what sort of NATO will be capable of being as effective in the future as it’s been in the last 80 years. It is a vital conversation that we do need to have, and we are right at the heart of that.”
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
New Sky News podcast launches on 10 June – The Wargame simulates an attack by Russia to test UK defences
Mr Rutte, a former Dutch prime minister, said last week he assumes alliance members will agree to a broad defence spending target of 5% of gross domestic product during the summit in The Hague on 24 and 25 June.
NATO can only act if all member states agree.
“Let’s say that this 5%, but I will not say what is the individual breakup, but it will be considerably north of 3% when it comes to the hard spend [on defence], and it will be also a target on defence-related spending,” the secretary general said.
The call for more funding comes at a time when allies are warning of growing threats from Russia, Iran, and North Korea as well as challenges posed by China.
But it also comes as European member states need to make NATO membership seem like a good deal for Donald Trump.
The leaders of all allies will meet in The Hague for the two-day summit.
Spotify
This content is provided by Spotify, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spotify cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spotify cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spotify cookies for this session only.
The US president has repeatedly criticised other member states for failing to meet a current target of spending 2% of national income on defence and has warned the United States would not come to the aid of any nation that is falling short.
Since returning to the White House, he has called for European countries to allocate 5% of their GDP to defence. This is more than the 3.4% of GDP currently spent by the US.
Mr Rutte is being credited with squaring away a new deal with Mr Trump in a meeting that would see allies increase their defence spending in line with the US president’s wishes.
The NATO chief is due to visit London on Monday, it is understood.
But what about his style ‘prince’? Some want that ditched too.
It’s a complicated but not impossible process. Andrew could, of course, just stop using it voluntarily.
Some want him to give up his home, too. For a non-working royal, the stately Royal Lodge, with its plum position on the Windsor Estate, is an uncomfortable optic.
With the reputation of the monarchy at risk, William does not want to appear weak. He’s putting loyalty to “the firm” firmly above his familial relationships.
Prince Andrew has always strongly denied the allegations, and restated on Friday: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me”. Sky News has approached him for comment on the fresh allegations set out in the Mail on Sunday.
But with Virginia Giuffre’s tragic death and posthumous memoir due out on Tuesday, Buckingham Palace will be braced for more scandal.
When Andrew gave up his titles, there was certainly a sense of relief.
There is now a sense of dread over what else could emerge.
Sky News’ royal commentator has explained why Prince Andrew has not given up being called a prince – while another expert has said “the decent thing” for him to do would be “go into exile” overseas.
Andrew announced on Friday that he would stop using his Duke of York title and relinquish all other honours, including his role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
However, he will continue to be known as a prince.
Royal commentator Alastair Bruce said that while Andrew’s other honours and titles were conferred to him later in life, he became a prince when he was born to Elizabeth II while she was queen.
He told presenter Kamali Melbourne: “I think […] that style was quite special to the late Queen,” he said. “And perhaps the King, for the moment, thinks that can be left alone.
“It’s a matter really for the King, for the royal household, perhaps with the guidance and advice of government, which I’m sure they are taking.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Since Andrew’s announcement, there has been speculation over whether any further measures will be taken – and one author has now called for him to “go into exile”.
More on Prince Andrew
Related Topics:
Andrew Lownie, author of The Rise And Fall Of The House Of York, said: “The only way the story will go away is if he leaves Royal Lodge, goes into exile abroad with his ex-wife, and is basically stripped of all his honours, including Prince Andrew.”
Royal Lodge is the Windsor mansion Andrew lives in with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, who has also lost her Duchess of York title.
Image: Andrew and his former wife continue to live on the Windsor estate. Pic: Reuters
Mr Lownie continued: “He makes out he’s an honourable man and he’s putting country and family first. Well, if he is, then the optics look terrible for the monarchy. A non-working royal in a 30-room Crown Estate property with a peppercorn rent.
“He should do the decent thing and go. And frankly, he should go into exile.”
Mr Lownie added if the Royal Family “genuinely want to cut links, they have to put pressure on him to voluntarily get out”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Andrew’s decision to stop using his titles was announced amid renewed scrutiny of his relationship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and fresh stories linked to the late Virginia Giuffre.
Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein, alleged she was sexually assaulted by Andrew on three occasions – which he has always vigorously denied.
Bereaved families whose loved ones took their own lives after buying the same poison online have written to the prime minister demanding urgent action.
Warning: This article contains references to suicide
The group claims there have been “multiple missed opportunities” to shut down online forums that promote suicide and dangerous substances.
They warn that over 100 people have died after purchasing a particular poison in the last 10 years.
Among those who have written to Downing Street is Pete Aitken, whose daughter Hannah was 22 when she took her own life after buying the poison from a website.
Hannah was autistic and had ADHD. She was treated in six different mental health hospitals over a four-year period.
He said: “Autistic people seem to be most vulnerable to this kind of sort of poison and, you know, wanting to take their lives.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:05
Pete Aitken speaking to Sky News
Sky News is not naming the poison, but Hannah was able to buy a kilogram of it online. Just one gram is potentially fatal.
“There’s this disparity between the concentration required for its legitimate use and that required for ending your life. And it seems quite clear you could make a distinction,” Mr Aitken said.
Analysis from the Molly Rose Foundation and the group Families and Survivors to Prevent Online Suicide Harms says at least 133 people have died because of the poison. It also says coroners have written warnings about the substance on 65 separate occasions.
The report accuses the Home Office of failing to strengthen the regulation of the poison and says not enough is being done to close dangerous suicide forums online.
Lawyers representing the group want a public inquiry into the deaths.
In a joint letter to the prime minister, the families said: “We write as families whose loved ones were let down by a state that was too slow to respond to the threat.
“This series of failings requires a statutory response, not just to understand why our loved ones died but also to prevent more lives being lost in a similar way.”
The group’s lawyer, Merry Varney, from Leigh Day, said: “The government is rightly committed to preventing deaths through suicide, yet despite repeated warnings of the risks posed by an easily accessible substance, fatal in small quantities and essentially advertised on online forums, no meaningful steps have been taken.”
Image: Hannah’s dad is one of the family members to have signed the letter
A government spokesperson said: “Suicide devastates families and we are unequivocal about the responsibilities online services have to keep people safe on their platforms.
“Under the Online Safety Act, services must take action to prevent users from accessing illegal suicide and self-harm content and ensure children are protected from harmful content that promotes it.
“If they fail to do so, they can expect to face robust enforcement, including substantial fines.”
They added that the position is “closely monitored and reportable under the Poisons Act, meaning retailers must alert authorities if they suspect it is being bought to cause harm”.
“We will continue to keep dangerous substances under review to ensure the right safeguards are in place,” they said.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.