Politics can be a rollercoaster. When Andy Burnham chose John Healey as the new Chancellor of the Exchequer in July, there were pricklings of hope that Healey might begin to extricate the government from its hazy morass of misdirection, inaction and false promises on defence spending. He had, after all, resigned from Sir Keir Starmer’s cabinet less than six weeks previously on exactly that issue. And he had done so with painful candour, his resignation letter providing a brutal punch to the embattled prime minister:

You have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.

You have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.

The two specific matters which caused Healey to depart were the failure to provide full funding for the government’s Defence Investment Plan (DIP) and Starmer’s refusal to set ‘a headmark date for [spending] 3 per cent of GDP on defence in 2030’. Unwittingly, Healey was setting the criteria for assessing his own Budget four months later.

Healey will not know – or will not reveal – for another year where he will find this money

Healey will not know – or will not reveal – for another year where he will find this money

On the DIP, Healey seems to be delivering. The woeful and faint-hearted settlement proposed by Starmer and then chancellor Rachel........

© The Spectator