Defence investment plan delay and drift has left the UK less safe, say MPs

A chronic delay in the release by Sir Keir Starmer’s government of a major plan to invest in defence has harmed the military and left the country less safe, a group of MPs has warned.

In a scathing report, the Public Accounts Committee said the absence of the long-awaited Defence Investment Plan (DIP) has undermined the UK’s credibility among its allies and risks “squandering the opportunities provided by advances in technology, hindering the government’s attempts to modernise the armed forces”.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the committee chair, criticised what he called “bureaucratic drift” and said excuses by those responsible for delivering the blueprint “to the effect of ‘taking the time to get the details right’ simply do not cut it”.

The senior Tory MP said: “Whatever the content of the DIP when it eventually does appear, the damage from its absence has been done – to the nation’s credibility, to its safety, to its armed forces, and to certainty within its entire defence industrial base.”

Small, medium and large defence companies – vital for any war effort – had been expecting to expand production lines at pace in preparation for the possibility of the UK being drawn into a conflict by 2030 – a timeline increasingly used by ministers and military chiefs.

Instead, many have been stuck in limbo, with some even going bust, because the publication last June of a sweeping defence review that mapped out the future size and shape of the armed forces was not followed by an investment plan to set out how it would be funded.

This body of work should have been published last autumn.

The prime minister has said it will be released before a NATO summit next month, with preparations under way for an announcement this Thursday – though that could still change.

A key factor behind the delay is a need for tens of billions of pounds of additional funding for the army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force to rearm faster and avoid further cuts.

Sir Keir, Rachel Reeves, his chancellor, and John Healey, the defence secretary, have been wrestling over the size of the extra money, with numbers ranging from £12bn to £18bn over four years, though the actual requirement is at least £28bn, probably more.

An inability to decide on the figure, means the investment plan cannot be finalised, which has led to paralysis across much of defence – an extraordinary predicament at a time of war in Ukraine, conflict in the Middle East and concerns over the reliability of the US as an ally.

“Any government minister attempting to explain away this delay to the DIP should instead ask themselves what message the bureaucratic drift of the past months has given to the public, as well as the UK’s allies and its adversaries, and simply apologise,” Sir Geoffrey said in incredibly blunt language.

“Whatever else the government hopes to achieve with the DIP, it has certainly gained the unwelcome honour of being the most anticipated document in my entire political career.

“As we still await its publication at time of writing, I know I speak for the defence interests of the whole UK when I say – this had better be good.”

Once the plan is published, the Public Accounts Committee will scrutinise how any new money is used as part of what is a yearly report into the Ministry of Defence‘s accounts.

The MoD has repeatedly been criticised for spending its already significant budget badly.

In this latest report, as well as focusing on the missing investment plan, the MPs were highly critical of one of the army’s most controversial programmes – the £6bn procurement of a fleet of hundreds of Ajax armoured fighting vehicles.

Years late and not yet operational, the platform has left dozens of soldiers suffering hearing problems and sickness.

One workaround has been to require soldiers to carry out maintenance checks after every use. Even the Public Accounts Committee – more familiar with bank statements than the battlefield – questioned just how viable that would be in the middle of combat.

It said the MoD is developing a package of upgrades to make the vehicle, built by the US defence company General Dynamics, a more comfortable ride.

The MPs added: “The department did not tell us the likely costs of these upgrades and we wait to see, more in hope than in expectation, whether these endeavours will succeed.”

Read more from Deborah Haynes:
UK working on major plan to prepare country for war
Push to transform ‘broken’ UK military is a ‘fiasco’
Russian submarines targeted UK cables, defence secretary says

Questions were also raised about the fast defence nuclear enterprise, charged with the nuclear deterrent submarines, missiles and warheads as well as a fleet of nuclear-powered upgrades – all of which are being replaced with new models in the biggest and costliest endeavour for the whole on the armed forces.

The Public Accounts Committee said the MoD accounts showed what it called an “unacceptable failure” to maintain accounting records for more than £6bn worth of assets. Some of this cost will need to be written off.

It underlined a long-standing push by the committee for greater access to the highly secretive accounting information underpinning investment in nuclear weapons. Expenditure is due to rise in the coming years to 25% of the total defence budget, up from 18%.

Sir Geoffrey said: “A new sensitive scrutiny mechanism is to be welcomed. Political uncertainty must not derail these arrangements, in order that the public may gain greater confidence that their money is being spent wisely.”

An MoD spokesperson said: “The government is providing a generational increase in defence spending, with an extra £270bn across this parliament, ensuring no return to the hollowed out armed forces of the past and the Strategic Defence Review sets out our path to increasing warfighting readiness.

“We are getting on with the job – since July 2024 we have signed over 1,400 major contracts, with nine-in-ten contracts going to British-based companies.”