Senior Defence Figures Criticize Starmer Over Military Underfunding

by Rachel Morgan News Editor

Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces mounting pressure from senior defence figures and members of his own party over the adequacy of the government’s defence investment plans. Former defence secretary John Healey, former defence minister Al Carns, and Chief of the Defence Staff Rich Knighton have publicly criticized the current funding trajectory, warning that the military risks being left unable to fulfill its operational requirements. This internal dissent coincides with broader political instability, as some Labour MPs urge the Prime Minister to establish a departure timetable.

Did You Know? The Ministry of Defence is expected to receive an additional £13.5bn over four years under the current Defence Investment Plan (Dip), yet senior officials argue this remains insufficient for necessary military transformation.

Why senior military leaders are concerned

The Chief of the Defence Staff, Rich Knighton, warned the parliament’s defence select committee that the military will be forced to “dial back” on operations if funding levels do not increase. Knighton specified that this reduction would impact exercises and operational activity across Europe, Ukraine, and the Middle East. His comments followed the resignations of John Healey and Al Carns, who both cited the Defence Investment Plan as a primary factor in their departure from the government.

Why senior military leaders are concerned

The political challenge to the Prime Minister

The criticism focuses on the government’s refusal to adopt more radical policy shifts. John Healey argued that the current plan, which includes a 0.08% rise in defence spending as a share of GDP between next year and 2030, falls short of the necessary rearmament of the armed forces. Healey specifically noted the lack of a clear path to reaching 3% or 3.5% of GDP spending by 2030. Meanwhile, Al Carns stated that the current strategy remains overly focused on preparing for “last year’s war” rather than future threats.

The political challenge to the Prime Minister

Expert Insight: The friction between the Prime Minister and his former ministers highlights a widening gap between administrative budget management and the strategic demands of high-level military officials. While Starmer defends his record by pointing to an increase in defence spending from 2.3% to 2.6% last year, the resignations suggest that senior figures view this as incremental change rather than the structural transformation required for modern geopolitical challenges.

What may happen next

The Prime Minister’s future could be influenced by the outcome of the Makerfield byelection this Thursday. Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham is campaigning on a platform that includes challenging the Prime Minister’s leadership. In response to these developments, former health secretary Wes Streeting has publicly called for Starmer to set out a timetable for his departure should Burnham succeed. Starmer has rejected these demands, stating that he intends to fight any potential leadership contest. Looking ahead, the new defence secretary, Dan Jarvis, has been given a two-week window to review the Defence Investment Plan and propose adjustments before the official announcement at the upcoming Nato summit in early July.

LIVE | UK Chief of Defence Staff Richard Knighton Appears Before Parliamentary Committee | APT

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did John Healey and Al Carns resign?
Both officials resigned in protest over the government’s Defence Investment Plan, which they argue fails to provide the necessary funding for the future of the armed forces.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the Chief of the Defence Staff say about military operations?
Rich Knighton stated that the military would have to reduce its exercise and operational activities in regions including Europe, Ukraine, and the Middle East if current resource funding does not increase.

How has Keir Starmer responded to the criticism?
The Prime Minister has insisted that he has delivered the biggest uplift in defence spending since the 1980s and stated he has no intention of stepping down, regardless of the results of the Makerfield byelection.

Given the competing demands for military funding and internal party pressure, how should the government prioritize its next steps for national security?

You may also like

Leave a Comment