BORIS Johnson’s Government has been accused of “totally inappropriate” priorities after he announced a renewed commitment to Trident and a boost to military spending by £16.5 billion over the next four years – insisting it would help strengthen the Union.
The Prime Minister provoked fury when he unveiled the huge increase to the Ministry of Defence’s budget despite refusing to support school hunger programmes or rule out a cut to overseas aid to the poorest countries in the world.
His plans also included a commitment to launch the UK’s first space rocket from Scotland.
He told the Commons: “We’re going to use our extra defence spending to restore Britain’s position as the foremost naval power in Europe.”
The Prime Minister said: “This will spur a renaissance of British shipbuilding across the UK. In Glasgow and South Belfast, Appledore and Birkenhead.
“Guaranteed jobs and illuminating the benefits of the Union in the white light of the arc-welders’ torch.
“If there is one policy which strengthens the UK in every possible sense it is building more ships for the Royal Navy.”
He added: “We shall deploy more of our naval assets in the world’s most important regions protecting the shipping lanes that supply our nation and we shall press on with renewing our nuclear deterrent.”
But anti-arms campaigners were furious.
“This is a totally inappropriate response to the pandemic. Only a matter of days ago the government was telling us that there wasn’t enough money to feed hungry school students during the holidays, but now it has found an extra £16bn to add to what was already one of the biggest military budgets in the world,” said Andrew Smith, of Campaign Against Arms Trade.
“The money should be used to build the green jobs that we need, and to fund the goods and services that we all rely on. It should not be used to buy evermore complex and deadly weapon systems.
“For far too long, UK security policy has been focused on military solutions, foreign wars of aggression and hypocritical and dangerous partnerships with human rights abusing regimes. These policies have caused a great deal of damage and have done nothing to keep us safe from many of the biggest threats, such as pandemics and climate change.
“The government should reconsider its priorities. Our security is not advanced by throwing money at the military. It is strengthened by building fairer societies that support the most vulnerable, and by investing in our public services.”
Stewart McDonald, the SNP’s defence spokesman, also hit back.
“This announcement clearly had one job: to give Tory backbenchers something to cheer about,” he said.
“It is also somewhat concerning to hear that this may come at the expense of international aid spending. This must be categorically ruled out and the commitments on aid spending protected.”
READ MORE: SNP unveil major document that highlights shortcomings of UK Government
He added: “Among all the announcements, there is no mention of the promise made in 2014 of 12,500 personnel stationed permanently in Scotland by the end of 2020. It is clear that this pledge, like so many others made in desperation by the UK Government during the first independence referendum, has been abandoned.”
The PM’s announcement was billed as the biggest increase in defence spending since the Cold War and forms part of a wider review of the UK’s foreign policy and security objectives which will now not be published until next year.
The plans will see the UK spend more on defence than any Nato member except the US.
Measures set out by the Prime Minister, who addressed MPs remotely as he continues his period of coronavirus self-isolation, include:
The creation of a national cyber force, which he said was already operating against terrorists, organised crime groups and hostile states
- A new “RAF space command launching British satellites and the first rocket from Scotland in 2022
- Restoring the UK’s position as the “foremost naval power in Europe”
- Reshaping the Army and strengthening the capabilities of special forces
- A new fighter system for the RAF, using artificial intelligence and drone technology
Johnson said the increase in defence spending is necessary to ensure the UK’s place on the global stage. “Extending British influence requires a once-in-a-generation modernisation of our Armed Forces and now is the right time to press ahead,” he said.
Johnson said the announcements mark the end of an “era of retreat” and could help create 10,000 jobs a year.
The plans mark the first phase of the Government’s integrated review of the UK’s foreign, defence, development and security policy, with the final conclusions due next year.
There has been speculation the aid budget will be slashed from 0.7% of national income to 0.5% in next week’s spending review as Whitehall is forced to tighten its belt in response to the economic damage caused by coronavirus.
Johnson refused to guarantee the 0.7% commitment will remain as he was challenged by MPs.
The Prime Minister told MPs the our-year funding deal would protect “hundreds of thousands” of jobs and create 40,000 new roles.
“I have decided that the era of cutting our defence budget must end, and it ends now,” he said.
Labour welcomed more defence spending but asked how it would be funded.
Economist Ben Zaranko, of the Institute of Fiscal Studies, said the figure of £16.5bn was a “misleading way to present this announcement”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel