The UK government faces intense scrutiny over the delayed release of its 10-year Defence Investment Plan (DIP), with the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warning that the nation has gone years without a credible plan for military capability. Defence Secretary John Healey stated on Monday that Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer remains “determined to publish” the plan before the upcoming Nato summit.
Did You Know? The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has signed more than 1,400 major defence contracts since July 2024, a move the department describes as a generational increase in spending intended to avoid a return to the “hollowed out armed forces of the past.”
Why the Delay Matters
The PAC report argues that the DIP’s absence is not merely a bureaucratic hurdle but a fundamental strategic failure. According to the committee, the delay stems from the MoD’s inability to decide which capabilities, infrastructure, and personnel are required to make the Armed Forces “warfighting-ready.”
The committee warns that this uncertainty carries significant financial and operational risks. Global instability is driving up prices from defence contractors, meaning procurement delays could result in higher costs for the taxpayer. Furthermore, the committee noted that the delay hampers the UK’s ability to equip its forces for the modern battlefield and undermines the MoD’s credibility with international allies and the domestic defence sector.
Ongoing Concerns Regarding Military Assets
Beyond the DIP, the PAC highlighted persistent issues with the Ajax armoured vehicle programme. Following reports in November 2025 that soldiers suffered from noise and vibration issues—with some experiencing vomiting—the army paused the vehicle’s use. The report found that 33 soldiers were affected, and as of March, five remain under medical review.
The committee described current MoD requirements for soldiers to conduct maintenance checks every time they stop the vehicles as “unreasonable” for combat scenarios. While an “Ajax 2” upgrade package is in development at an unknown cost, the committee stated it awaits the outcome “more in hope than expectation.”
Expert Insight: The intersection of accounting discrepancies and procurement failures suggests a systemic challenge within the Ministry of Defence. The reported “unacceptable failure” to support £6bn+ of assets in accounting records, combined with rising nuclear expenditure—now 18% of the budget and expected to climb to 25%—points to a difficult balancing act between maintaining a credible nuclear deterrent, such as the £31bn Dreadnought-class submarine programme, and ensuring conventional forces are fit for purpose.
What Happens Next
The PAC has issued six formal recommendations to the MoD, requiring the department to provide updates on its path forward. Within three months, the MoD must explain how it will utilize the DIP in the context of the changing international situation and how it intends to mitigate the impact of the delays on its suppliers. The MoD is also expected to clarify when the Ajax vehicle will be “fit for purpose” and how it will provide more transparency regarding the cost and performance of the nuclear enterprise.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the current status of the Defence Investment Plan?
The plan is delayed, though Defence Secretary John Healey has indicated that the Prime Minister is determined to publish it before the Nato summit, which begins on 7 July.
Why is the Public Accounts Committee concerned about the Ajax programme?
The committee expressed concern over health issues—specifically noise and vibration—that affected 33 soldiers, and questioned the reasonableness of current operating restrictions that require frequent maintenance checks.
What is the status of the MoD’s accounting records?
The PAC report identified a “completely unacceptable failure” to maintain records supporting more than £6 billion in assets. The MoD has stated this discrepancy relates to how funds paid over the past 15 years are currently accounted for.
Are the current delays in defence procurement creating a lasting impact on the UK’s sovereign military capability?
