The symphony of criticism aimed at the government for failing to live up to its promises of boosting Britain’s defences came to its crescendo this week. The lead author of last year’s strategic defence review (SDR), former Labour defence secretary and Nato secretary general Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, gave a speech at Salisbury’s Guildhall in which he savaged Sir Keir Starmer’s administration: he identified ‘a corrosive complacency today in Britain’s political leadership’ and accused ministers of paying ‘lip service’ to ‘the risks, the threats, the bright red signals of danger’.

One of the mainstays of the criticism aimed at the government is the months-long, ongoing delay in publishing the defence investment plan (DIP). This was scheduled in the third quarter of last year as a costed framework for implementing the recommendations of the SDR drafted by Robertson, former head of joint forces command General Sir Richard Barrons and ex-US national security council Europe and Russia director Dr Fiona Hill. It is now believed it will not be issued until June at the earliest.

Which is to be master? Downing Street or the Treasury?

Which is to be master? Downing Street or the Treasury?

Now we know what is delaying the DIP so badly and damagingly: Rachel Reeves and HM Treasury. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is said to have proposed an increase in military expenditure of under £10 billion over the next four years, plainly inadequate when the armed forces are........

© The Spectator