It is hard to imagine many people will miss Sir Keir Starmer now he has gone. Perhaps, like phantom limb syndrome, he will continue to cause pain even though it was generally agreed that amputation was the best option. This week, however, after new boy Andy Burnham delivered a windy address on social care in Golders Green, there were exchanges in the subsequent question-and-answer session which made it feel as if Sir Keir had never left at all.

The new Prime Minister was asked whether he would commit to spending 3 per cent of GDP by 2030. He would not. Wes Streeting, the new Defence Secretary, has also refused to make such a promise, although he has said more vaguely that he would resign if the Defence Invetstment Plan is not ‘fully funded’.

If the government cannot increase spending from 2.6 per cent this year to 3 per cent by 2030, why should anyone believe it can meet the more difficult Nato-agreed target of 3.5 per cent by 2035?

If the government cannot increase spending from 2.6 per cent this year to 3 per cent by 2030, why should anyone believe it can meet the more difficult Nato-agreed target of 3.5 per cent by 2035?

Why is the 2030 defence target significant? Nato has set no target of expenditure for the end of this decade. What was agreed at the Hague Summit in June 2025 was that Nato members would ‘invest 5 per cent of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending… to ensure our individual and collective obligations’. The ‘core defence requirements’ represent 3.5........

© The Spectator