Healey says DIP ‘well short of what’s required’, and UK’s enemies ‘don’t follow timetable set by Treasury’
Healey said Keir Starmer knows what is needed.
The prime minister knows what the country needs for defence. He spelled out the threat this month when he said it is our intelligence assessment and the assessment of other countries in NATO that there could be an attack by Russia on Nato as soon as 2030.
So Britain must set the head mark of spending 3% on defence in 2030, and a clear path to 3.5% in 2035.
The commitment all Nato nations have made to each other and to their people … commands wide cross-party support.
Our predecessors in this house experienced what happens when deterrence fails. Our predecessors in this House entrusted us with institutions like Nato that they created to keep us safe.
We don’t choose the circumstances in which we serve or the responsibilities that fall upon us, either in this house or in government.
And it’s the duty of our political generation now to ready Britain for the uncertainties of the years to come. The decisions that we make in the months ahead will be judged by those who follow us.
At this dangerous time. I see the current defence investment plans falling well short of what is required, a rise of 0.08% from next year to 2030.
No date for reaching 3%, no path to 3.5% by 2030.
Well over half of Nato members will be spending 3% or more. And when allies are looking for British leadership, we must not fall behind.
When NATO needs European nations to step up, we must not fall short.
Our adversaries don’t follow timetable set by the Treasury.
Key events
-
Bridget Phillipson says Badenoch’s ‘Gestapo’ jibe about her shows she’s ‘not fit to be PM’
-
Starmer and von der Leyen agree next UK-EU summit to take place on 22 July
-
Starmer denies being snubbed by Trump at G7 summit
-
John Healey and Al Carns’ resignation speeches – snap verdict
-
Carns suggests Northern Ireland Troubles bill will help republicans achieve what IRA wanted
-
Carns says MoD spending ‘too much time preparing for last year’s war, not tomorrow’s’
-
Al Carns suggests Labour has let down its core voters in his resignation speech to MPs
-
Healey says UK needs ‘bigger view of national security’
-
Healey says DIP ‘well short of what’s required’, and UK’s enemies ‘don’t follow timetable set by Treasury’
-
Healey says defence needs ‘harder choices’, not just ‘incremental change’
-
Healey says he thinks his resignation will ‘in time’ help ensure defence gets more funding
-
John Healey delivers statement on his resignation to MPs
-
710 migrants arrived in small boats on Monday, figures show – but overall arrivals down 40% on same point in 2025
-
UK will have to ‘dial back’ military plans without more funding, says chief of defence staff
-
Having Burnham, not Starmer, as leader would give Labour 4-point boost against Reform UK, poll suggests
-
Greens condemn Streeting’s call for Rosebank and Jackdaw drilling as ‘environmentally reckless’
-
Burnham’s approval ratings down since he launched byelection campaign, but still far better than his rivals’, polls show
-
Starmer should set out timetable for his departure if Burnham wins byelection, Streeting says
-
Starmer says Dan Jarvis, new defence secretary, being consulted on DIP ahead of final version being published
-
Starmer says arson attacks on property linked to him should be seen in ‘broader context’ of Russian threat
-
Streeting warns against ‘expensive’ pledges in leadership contest, and defends bond markets, in dig at Burnham
-
Streeting says UK capitalism ‘suffers from lack of competition’ as he makes case for ‘progressive capitalism’
-
Thames Water nationalisation moves closer as government ‘objects to rescue deal’
-
Elon Musk claims social media ban for under-16s shows UK ‘police state’
-
UK ministers lobby Trump to avert backlash against social media ban
-
Starmer vows new sanctions on Russia and nuclear energy support for Ukraine
-
Anti-Burnham fake news on Makerfield Facebook accounts has surged, report finds
Bridget Phillipson says Badenoch’s ‘Gestapo’ jibe about her shows she’s ‘not fit to be PM’
Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, has finally got round to reading Tim Shipman’s account in the Spectator of the live interview he did with Kemi Badenoch at an event last week. She is not happy.
In a passage praising Badenoch’s willingness to be direct, Shipman says:
Ed Miliband’s insistence that these assets remain in the ground is ‘very much like what the Nigerian military dictatorships were doing in the 1980s and 1990s’. Bridget Phillipson, by raiding VAT on private school fees ‘has acted like a Gestapo officer’. Of Starmer she says: ‘I’ve grown to feel sorry for him, but I have also grown to dislike the way he does not take any responsibility.’
This afternoon Phillipson has posted a message on social media saying:
The Gestapo marched hundreds of thousands of innocent people to their deaths.
I’ve ended private schools’ tax breaks to invest in state schools.
No responsible leader makes vile comparisons like this. Kemi Badenoch is not fit to be Prime Minister.
Starmer and von der Leyen agree next UK-EU summit to take place on 22 July
Keir Starmer and Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission’s president, have agreed that the next UK-EU summit will take place on Wednesday 22 July.
After they met at the G7 summit, Starmer said:
My Labour government is delivering on our promise to reset our relationship and put Britain at the heart of Europe.
Together we will tackle the cost of living, boost jobs and create opportunities for young people.
Starmer denies being snubbed by Trump at G7 summit
Keir Starmer has denied being snubbed by Donald Trump at the G7 in France after the two did not have a bilateral meeting at the summit. Alexandra Topping has the story.
John Healey and Al Carns’ resignation speeches – snap verdict
It would be easy to assume that, because John Healey and Al Carns both served with each other as defence ministers, and because they resigned on the same day for the same reason, they were engaged in some sort of common endeavour. Anyone watching them give consecutive “personal statements” in the Commons about why they resigned would realise that is completely wrong.
Although they were sitting not far from each other in the chamber, there was little interaction between them and their relationship seemed frosty. By all accounts, it is.
They both criticised the defence investment plan, but Carns suggested the main problem with the Dip was not how much was being spent, but what it was being spent on. (See 2.33pm.) This was an implicit criticism of the plan Healey had spent a year developing. He was also fiercely critical of the Northern Ireland Troubles bill – not Healey’s legislation, but legislation that Healey has been willing to support.
Healey started his own speech with a passage about his lifelong commitment to Labour. This may not have been intended as a jibe against Carns, who has very little Labour history because he spent his career in the armed forces where politics is shunned. But, even if that was not the purpose, it served to remind Labour MPs which of the two ex-ministers has deepest roots in the party. Carns does not have a privileged background, being brought up by a single mother in Aberdeen, but his evocation of the Labour party “chiselled out of the mines of the north-east” sounded a bit hackneyed, and it bore little relationship to Labour as it is now.
Quentin Letts, the Mail sketchwriter, says, watching from the gallery, it was clear who went down best with Labour MPs.
Healey’s the more powerful (and short) of the two resignation statements. Carns speaks as if addressing a parade ground. Plenty of Lab MPs nodded to both speeches but some backbenchers looked mutinous during Carns.
Carns suggests Northern Ireland Troubles bill will help republicans achieve what IRA wanted
In his speech Carns also said he thought the defence investment plans was not sufficiently funded.
But he then went on to spent more time talking about another reason for his resignation – his opposition to the Northern Ireland Troubles bill. On this, he went even further than he did in his resignation letter last week – because he suggested the legislation would help republicans achieve what the IRA was fighting for.
He said:
The IRA failed to achieve its political ends through the use of terrorist tactics. We must be exceptionally careful that we do not help them achieve those ends through other means.
The constant, never-ending legal wranglings that undermine the contract between the nation and those that serve is neither a good use of taxpayer money nor an effective execution of strategy.
Inquests, inquiries and an independent commission create a hierarchy of truth. It will cost us hundreds of millions for 15 years, painting the state as an aggressor, supporting our adversaries’ political objections and causing untold anguish for those that only ever deployed to protect us.
We have neither the political capital nor the resources to spare for this unjust journey.
Carns says MoD spending ‘too much time preparing for last year’s war, not tomorrow’s’
Carns cited the defence investment plan (Dip) as the first reason for his resignation.
But, unlike Healey, who in his resignation letter last week and in his speech to MPs cited funding as the main problem with the Dip, Carns suggested the main problem was that it was focused on the wrong items.
This was an implicit criticism of Healey, who (unlike Carns) had been working on the Dip for months.
Explaining why he quit, Carns said:
Firstly, because I no longer believe the defence investment plan was preparing for the wars we are most likely to fight.
The character of warfare is changing at an exceptional speed.
In Ukraine a navy without a ship has destroyed a navy. A drone costing thousands candestroy a tank costing millions. A drone can now strike 2000km into Russia at a fraction of the cost of a fighter jet.
It is not either/or. It’s an equitable mix of high-end sophistication coupled with low-end mass. That’s the balance we must seek.
But from my view, the defence investment plan did not strike that balance for various reasons.
Carns went on to give an example.
I want to give just a small example to bring that home because it can be often lost.
In a town in Ukraine similar to the same size as Hereford in one day there were 12,000 drones in the air. Just comprehend that – 12,000 drones in the air and 90% of all casualties are from drones.
Not the rifle, not the grenade, not the tank, not the artillery, but from drones.
What will it take to realise these figures are not fiction. They’re not an embellishment of the truth, but a hard fact born the blood and the steel of a hot war.
That is the mass of modern war – millions of drones against high-end, sophisticated systems that deliver late with huge levels of inflation and, importantly, cannot be reproduced at the pace required to sustain a conflict against a major adversary.
Carns said that Britain should not have to relearn lessons it had learned in the past about investing money in the wrong defence equipment. He went on:
We are no longer packaging up our military to deploy to a foreign field, but being ready to fight from here, right from the home base, for democracy, for the right to self-determination and for European security. The reality is we are spending too much time preparing for last year’s war, not tomorrow’s.
And I urge the house to push for transformation, push hard and push for delivery this side of 2030.
Al Carns suggests Labour has let down its core voters in his resignation speech to MPs
Healey was followed in the Commons by Al Carns, who also resigned as armed forces minister on Thursday last week, about eight hours after Healey. Like Healey, Carns also said he was going because he thought the defence investment plan (Dip) was under-funded. But there has been speculation that he only decided to quit after it became clear that he was not being offered Healey’s job.
Carns told MPs that resigning as a minister was “an exceptionally difficult decision”.
He said that, when he accepted ministerial office, he did so “with a simple purpose to serve those that serve us”. He went on:
There comes a point when honesty requires action. And for me, that point came last week.
As honourable members know, I came into politics for one reason. That was to enact change.
But to be able to work out where you’re going, we must realise where we have come from. The Labour party I joined is one that was chiselled out of the mines of the north-east. It was hammered out of the shipyards of Govan, Liverpool and Belfast. And it was forged in the factories of the industrial revolution.
Calloused hands, sore backs, people who did a hard day’s graft and asked for one thing in return – a government that has their back.
That’s the tradition I serve in this house, and it’s a tradition that shaped that decision I took last week.
And I resigned for several reasons.
Healey says UK needs ‘bigger view of national security’
Healey said he was grateful to cabinet colleagues who agreed to cuts to fund higher defence spending.
He went on:
There are credible ways of meeting the mid-term funding challenges, working multinationally and as other nations in Europe are doing.
They could allow us to protect the ability to deliver our Labour missions across government.
Healey also calls for a different approach to defence.
We need a bigger view of national security. It’s not just the job for defence or the agencies. Every department has a part to play in national security and national resilience.
From energy to transport to health, security must run through the government like letters through a stick of rock.
And security must be felt in the communities right across Britain, reversing long term decline and bringing new jobs and new hope.
At the start of his speech Healey said that, now he was no longer defence secretary, he was glad he did not have to sleep with three phones by his bed. He ended with a joke about his personal love for HP sauce.
For now, Jackie [Healey’s wife] is just grateful I no longer carry three phones in my bag, although I do still have my bottle of HP sauce.
Healey says DIP ‘well short of what’s required’, and UK’s enemies ‘don’t follow timetable set by Treasury’
Healey said Keir Starmer knows what is needed.
The prime minister knows what the country needs for defence. He spelled out the threat this month when he said it is our intelligence assessment and the assessment of other countries in NATO that there could be an attack by Russia on Nato as soon as 2030.
So Britain must set the head mark of spending 3% on defence in 2030, and a clear path to 3.5% in 2035.
The commitment all Nato nations have made to each other and to their people … commands wide cross-party support.
Our predecessors in this house experienced what happens when deterrence fails. Our predecessors in this House entrusted us with institutions like Nato that they created to keep us safe.
We don’t choose the circumstances in which we serve or the responsibilities that fall upon us, either in this house or in government.
And it’s the duty of our political generation now to ready Britain for the uncertainties of the years to come. The decisions that we make in the months ahead will be judged by those who follow us.
At this dangerous time. I see the current defence investment plans falling well short of what is required, a rise of 0.08% from next year to 2030.
No date for reaching 3%, no path to 3.5% by 2030.
Well over half of Nato members will be spending 3% or more. And when allies are looking for British leadership, we must not fall behind.
When NATO needs European nations to step up, we must not fall short.
Our adversaries don’t follow timetable set by the Treasury.
Healey says defence needs ‘harder choices’, not just ‘incremental change’
Healey says the government has been working 12 months on the defence investment plan.
Since the SDR [strategic defence review] we’ve seen the world changing still faster, with threats increasing and demands on defence, rising conflict in the Middle East, new Nato missions in the High North, the US moving forces away from Europe, intensifying attacks in Ukraine and increasing Russian aggression towards the UK.
Nato has now said we must prepare for war with Russia within the next five years.
This is the age of hard power and rising threat. This is not the moment for calibration or incremental change.
This means bigger politics, bolder priorities, harder choices.
Healey says he it was a privilege to serve as defence secretary.
And he stresses his commitment to Labour.
I’ve been a Labour MP for nearly 30 years, a Labour team member for 45 years, a trade unionist for longer still.
It is my family, literally. Jackie, my wife worked for Labour HQ. We met at a union conference. Two weeks later we were engaged.
He says he only wanted a successful Labour government.
He says he is proud of the party’s record on defence.
I’m proud of what we’ve done in less than two years as a Labour government.
We stepped up into national leadership for Ukraine. We’ve raised defence investment three years earlier than anyone expected, won record defence export deals, given the armed forces their biggest pay rise for 20 years, brought 36,000 forces family homes back into public ownership, and we’ve signed major defence agreements with Germany, Norway, France and the European Union delivering for defence, delivering for Britain.
Healey says he thinks his resignation will ‘in time’ help ensure defence gets more funding
Healey says he thinks his resignation will help get the MoD more funding.
I took the decision to resign with the very greatest regret and reluctance. I continue to be certain about this decision.
In time I believe it will be seen as necessary in securing the future of our armed forces and of our alliances.
John Healey delivers statement on his resignation to MPs
John Healey is delivering a personal statement to MPs on his resignation last week as defence secretary.
He starts:
Many in the media have pressed me to say more since Thursday, but I’m a proud parliamentarian.
I wanted first to speak in this house as I take my seat, as I take my seat on the backbenches for the first time for more than 10 years.
710 migrants arrived in small boats on Monday, figures show – but overall arrivals down 40% on same point in 2025
Some 710 migrants arrived in the UK on Monday after crossing the Channel, the highest number on a single day so far this year, the Press Association reports. PA says:
It follows a spell without crossings, with no migrants having made the journey between 1 June and 14 June.
The cumulative number of arrivals by small boats in 2026 now stands at 9,852, according to provisional figures from the Home Office.
This is down 40% on the equivalent point last year, when the total stood at 16,317.
It is also 14% below this point in 2024, when the total was 11,431.
There were 11 boats that arrived on Monday, which suggests an average of around 65 people per boat.
UK will have to ‘dial back’ military plans without more funding, says chief of defence staff
Britain will have to “dial back” on military operations and exercises in the next few years if the Ministry of Defence (MoD) does not receive extra funding from Downing Street and the Treasury, Rich Knighton, the chief of the defence staff, has told peers. Dan Sabbagh has the story.
Having Burnham, not Starmer, as leader would give Labour 4-point boost against Reform UK, poll suggests
The new polling from Ipsos released today also shows how people say they would vote given a choice between a Reform UK party led by Nigel Farage and a Labour party led by either Keir Starmer or Andy Burnham.
While Burnham is considerably more popular with voters than Starmer, these figures suggest that, were Burnham to become leader, there would be a significant, but not huge, rise in the number of people inclined to vote Labour.
The figures show a Starmer-led Labour party 9 points ahead of Reform, and a Burnham-led Labour party 13-points ahead.
Polling like this is particularly speculative, and ultimately it is very had to know how voters would react to a Burnham-led government because we don’t know what it would do. We don’t even know who the chancellor would be. But these figures imply that, while having Burnham as leader would help Labour electorally, his impact might be more incremental than transformative.
Greens condemn Streeting’s call for Rosebank and Jackdaw drilling as ‘environmentally reckless’
The Green party has criticised Wes Streeting for his call for new drilling to be allowed from the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields in the North Sea. (See 10.44am.) Commenting on Streeting’s speech, Rachel Millward, the Greens’ co-deputy leader, said:
Wes Streeting has ceased to be relevant, but his so-called ‘progressive capitalism’ shows the degree to which fossil fuel corporations have their grubby hands all over Labour policy.
His call to open up new drilling in the North Sea is environmentally reckless and economically illiterate.
Rosebank alone contains enough fossil fuel to produce over 200 million tonnes of CO2 if burned – more than the combined annual emissions of 28 low-income countries.
Opening up these oilfields will do nothing to improve energy security or bring down bills either, because any oil and gas extracted will be sold at global prices on the world market.
Greenpeace UK also condemned the speech. Angharad Hopkinson, a Greenpeace campaigner, said:
Flogging more oil and gas from the North Sea to pay for cleaner energy sounds like a business scheme worthy of Del Boy. Any windfall from tax receipts would only be temporary because this basin is in terminal decline, not to mention the escalating costs in lives and money from more extreme weather. Streeting is backing the wrong horse several decades after it has bolted.
Burnham’s approval ratings down since he launched byelection campaign, but still far better than his rivals’, polls show
Andy Burnham has become less popular with British voters as a whole following his decision to stand as Labour’s candidate in the Markerfield byelection, according to two separate polls published today.
Burnham is still more popular than other Labour politicians. But the polling suggests some voters have become more negative about him as a result of his decision to put himself forward as a byelection candidate in the clear hope off being able to replace Keir Starmer.
Here are the figures from YouGov.
YouGov says:
In earlier polls in this series, Andy Burnham achieved a positive net favourability rating (+9 at its peak). However, his popularity declined starting from the middle of May – the period that encompassed the Labour party revolt against Keir Starmer that included Wes Streeting’s resignation and Josh Simons stepping down in Makerfield, triggering the by-election that Andy Burnham is likely to win.
As a result, Burnham now takes a net favourability rating of -11 in our latest poll: 30% of Britons like the would-be PM, versus 41% who dislike him.
The YouGov report also says Wes Streeting’s unfavourability ratings have risen since he resigned as health secretary with the intention of challenging Starmer for his job, and Ipsos in its report says it has picked up on the same trend.
According to Ipsos, Burnham’s ratings have fallen in particular with people over the age of 55, people who voted Conservative in 2024, people who think Labour is doing a bad job in government and people from Scotland.
However, the Ipsos report also shows that, of the 17 leading politicians it polled, Burnham has the highest – or least negative – favourability rating.
Starmer should set out timetable for his departure if Burnham wins byelection, Streeting says
Peter Walker
Peter Walker is a Guardian senior political correspondent.
Keir Starmer should set a timetable for his departure if Andy Burnham wins the Makerfield byelection on Thursday rather than battle to stay in Downing Street, Wes Streeting has said.
Answering questions after his speech on the economy (see 10.44am and 11.32am), Streeting reaffirmed that he would fight in any leadership battle, and insisted he has the necessary support among Labour MPs, but refused to say whether he would trigger a contest.
He said:
I would hope that after Thursday’s byelection, when the results are in, and I very much hope Andy Burnham wins … I hope the prime minister will at that stage reflect on his own position and set out a timetable. I think that would be a better way forward for everyone and would enable that better culture that we aspire to.
When he resigned as health secretary last month, Streeting had been expected to trigger a leadership contest himself, and the fact he did not prompted opponents to assume he did not have the backing of the 80 other Labour MPs needed to trigger the process.
Asked if he did now, Streeting replied: “Yes, I have the support I need to be on the ballot.”
However, he refused to say whether he might seek to trigger it next week. He said:
I think I’ve been extremely clear about this. I think there should be a contest. I have every intention of standing in that contest, and I’ve not triggered a contest, because we’ve got a byelection under way where one of the inevitable candidates is on the ballot paper.
To have sought a contest before Burnham was potentially back in parliament would be to “pull a fast one”, Streeting argued.
