Starmer denies Trump is setting UK policy as defence spending is increased
The Prime Minister told a Downing Street press conference that he has been ‘arguing for some time’ that Europe and the UK ‘needed to do more’.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1e6e/a1e6e4d89ef1243ff42e6c6c7c0436e56d95683f" alt="Sir Keir Starmer speaking in front of UK Government sign"
Sir Keir Starmer has denied that Donald Trump is setting UK Government policy, as he said that the choice to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP is “very much my decision”.
The Prime Minister told a Downing Street press conference that he has been “arguing for some time” that Europe and the UK “needed to do more” for collective defence and security.
Sir Keir Starmer announced a dramatic increase in defence spending from its current 2.3% to 2.5% by 2027 in response to “tyrant” Vladimir Putin and amid uncertainty over the US’s commitment to European security.
The increase in military funding increase is coming at the expense of the aid budget, which has triggered fierce criticisms from charities, but Sir Keir has defenced his choice, telling reporters that there is “no driver” of of poverty like conflict.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3991a/3991a79049780f8be252686017a82a8d2df677a0" alt="Russian invasion of Ukraine"
The change in approach from the UK comes ahead of the Prime Minister’s trip to Washington for talks with Mr Trump, who has repeatedly called for European nations to up their defence spending.
Kyiv has meanwhile agreed a framework for an economic deal with the US which will see them trade rights to rare minerals in exchange for continued aid, Ukrainian officials have said.
The deal, which was pushed for by Mr Trump’s new US administration amid a war of words with Ukraine’s leaders, will see the two countries jointly develop the country’s untapped natural resources.
Plans are being drawn up for Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky to visit Washington, DC on Friday, as the agreement is signed.
Asked what he might say to people who assume the US president is setting UK policy, Sir Keir said the increase in defence spending is “very much my decision” and he has been “arguing for some time” that Europe and the UK “needed to do more”.
“Yes, it’s true President Trump thinks we should do more, and I agree with him,” he said.
“It chimes with my thinking on this. And by more, I mean more capability, I mean more co-ordination, and I mean more spending.
“And we have to learn the lessons of the conflict, particularly when it comes to capability and co-ordination.”
He said we have to respond to what is happening in Ukraine “for the safety and security” of the UK and added: “So, this is very much my decision, based on my assessment of the circumstances that we face as a country, and it is taken first and foremost, to ensure that the United Kingdom and its citizens are safe and secure.
“That is the first duty that I have as Prime Minister. It is my duty, my responsibility, and that is why I have taken this decision today.”
The Prime Minister told the Commons on Tuesday that spending on defence will rise from its current 2.3% share of the economy to 2.5% in 2027.
That will mean spending £13.4 billion more every year from 2027, something which Sir Keir acknowledged will require “extremely difficult and painful choices”.
He said he wants that figure to reach 3% of gross domestic product during the next Parliament.
But to fund it, development assistance aid will be slashed from its current level of 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% in 2027.
Sir Keir told MPs the plan amounts to “the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War”.
Charities have said they are “shocked” and “stunned” by the decision, but Sir Keir has defended the move.
He told the press conference that it “is not a decision I wanted to make” but it was “necessary for the protection of our country”.
“It is important that I am clear that we will continue our support in areas such as Gaza, Sudan, Ukraine, of course. That’s the context in which we’ve made this decision,” he told the conference.
The Prime Minister also revealed that he will host European leaders over the weekend to discuss future defence.
“I am hosting a number of countries at the weekend for us to continue to discuss how we go forward together as allies in light of the situation that we face,” he said.
The gathering is likely to feature a similar group who appeared at a recent summit convened in Paris, including leaders from Germany, Spain, Italy, France, the Netherlands and the EU Commission.
Sir Keir spoke with Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday following the French President’s visit to Washington DC.
The two leaders both “reiterated that Ukraine must be at the heart of any negotiations” during the phone call, according to Downing Street.
The Government has a legal duty for aid spending to meet the United Nations target of 0.7% of gross national income, but that has not been the case since it was cut to 0.5% during the pandemic.
In the financial year 2023-24, the Ministry of Defence spent around £53.9 billion. According to documents from last October’s Budget, this was predicted to increase to £59.8 billion by 2025-26 under the old funding models, a rise of 2.3%.
However, Sir Keir told the Commons on Tuesday that the changes will mean “spending an £13.4 billion more on defence every year from 2027”.
Even with the increases, defence will not be near the top of the list of the Government departments with the largest expenditure.
The Department of Health and Social Care spent around £188.5 billion in 2023-24, a figure projected at last year’s Budget to hit £214.1 billion by 2025-26.
Early reaction from the United States to the defence spending hike was warm, with the American defence secretary Pete Hegseth describing it as a “strong step from an enduring partner”.
Some have however questioned the Government’s figures as it plots out the aid cut to pay for extra defence spending.
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, claimed ministers were “playing silly games with numbers” and had provided “totally inconsistent figures” measured against different benchmarks.