Category: Defence

  • Rishi Sunak – 2024 Defence Speech Made in Warsaw

    Rishi Sunak – 2024 Defence Speech Made in Warsaw

    The speech made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, in Warsaw on 23 April 2024.

    My first duty as Prime Minister is the security of the British people.

    And fulfilling that profound responsibility is only possible because of you.

    Just ten days ago, I gave the order for the RAF to join an international effort…

    …intercepting a barrage of Iranian missiles headed towards Israel.

    Those pilots, like you, and like every generation of British service men and women before you…

    …were willing to put their own safety over the line…

    …for the security of others and the defence of our liberties and our values.

    From your Regiment’s service in Iraq and Afghanistan…

    …to your current role here in Poland, protecting NATO’s eastern flank…

    …you have made those sacrifices in the service of our country.

    I am truly humbled by your courage and professionalism.

    And on behalf of a proud and grateful nation, let me simply say: thank you.

    But I haven’t just brought you together today to express my gratitude.

    I want to talk to you about how we equip you to do your duty…

    …in an increasingly dangerous world.

    We have entered a period of history in which competition between countries has sharpened profoundly.

    An axis of authoritarian states with different values to ours…

    …like Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China…

    …are increasingly assertive.

    The danger they pose is not new.

    But what is new is that these countries – or their proxies…

    …are causing more instability, more quickly, in more places at once.

    And they’re increasingly acting together…

    …making common cause in an attempt to reshape the world order.

    Now I know there are some people who will think these are faraway problems.

    But they are not.

    They pose real risks to the United Kingdom’s security and prosperity.

    Russia has already poisoned people on British soil with chemical weapons.

    Caused energy bills to soar.

    Weaponised migration.

    And sent technology to Iran in exchange for weapons, like the Shaheed drones…

    …that I saw myself are wreaking such devastation on Ukraine.

    Iran themselves have threatened to kill and kidnap people within our borders for exercising their right to free speech.

    And used proxies like the Houthis, to attack British ships in the Red Sea…

    …disrupting supplies of crucial goods to our high streets.

    North Korea, too, is supplying munitions and artillery to Russia…

    …and their hackers have targeted British businesses and the NHS.

    And Chinese state-affiliated actors have conducted malicious cyber campaigns…

    …against British MPs.

    China itself is engaged in a huge military modernisation programme.

    Potential flashpoints in the Indo-Pacific…

    …could have an impact on the global economy far larger even than Covid.

    And China is increasingly working with others to try and reshape the world…

    …including their so-called ‘unlimited partnership’ with Russia.

    So the new assertiveness of these authoritarian states far from our shores must concern us.

    Because they are increasingly acting together…

    …against the fundamental values that we all hold dear…

    …of democracy, freedom, and the rule of law.

    Now, we must not overstate the danger.

    We’re not on the brink of war.

    And nor do we seek it.

    And people should feel reassured…

    …that the UK’s armed forces are some of the most professional…

    …well-trained, well-equipped, and battle-ready in the world.

    And I’m incredibly proud of all they’ve achieved.

    From patrolling the Arctic Circle as part of the Joint Expeditionary Force…

    …to the campaign against Daesh in the deserts of Iraq and Syria.

    From protecting the freedom of navigation in the Red Sea…

    …to policing the skies above Eastern Europe.

    And just look at the investments we’ve made in the last decade.

    £40 billion in the British Army…

    …who proudly provide one of NATO’s strategic reserves…

    …with 16,000 troops deployed to Europe this year.

    The Royal Air Force, equipped with new Typhoons, Chinooks, F35s…

    …with the GCAP programme delivering new fighter jets with Japan and Italy.

    The Royal Navy is a carrier navy once again…

    …with 22 new ships and submarines on the way…

    …and the historic AUKUS partnership building the most advanced nuclear-powered subs the world has ever known.

    And we’ve launched a new national endeavour to invigorate and invest more in our nuclear deterrent.

    And all of this is combined with our outstanding diplomatic network…

    …development expertise, law enforcement and intelligence agencies…

    …and our support for allies – above all the £12bn we’ve provided to Ukraine.

    So I’m proud of our record on defence.

    And confident in our ability to deter our adversaries.

    …and ensure the security of the United Kingdom.

    But in a world that’s the most dangerous…

    …it’s been since the end of the Cold War…

    …we cannot – and must not – be complacent.

    As Churchill said, in 1934:

    “To urge the preparation of defence is not to assert the imminence of war.

    On the contrary, if war were imminent…

    …preparations for defence would be too late.”

    I believe we must do more…

    …to defend our country, our interests, and our values.

    So today, I’m announcing…

    …the biggest strengthening of our national defence for a generation.

    We will increase defence spending to a new baseline of 2.5% of GDP, by 2030.

    That starts today.

    And rises steadily in each and every year.

    Over the next six years, we’ll invest an additional £75bn in our defence.

    And it will be fully funded with no increase in borrowing or debt.

    So this is not some vague aspiration for the future.

    We have a clear plan for what we’ll spend, when we’ll spend it, and how we pay for it.

    A plan that makes the United Kingdom by far the largest defence power in Europe – and second largest in NATO.

    Today is a landmark moment in the defence of the United Kingdom.

    This is a generational investment in British security and British prosperity.

    It makes us safer at home and stronger abroad.

    Now we have three immediate priorities for this new investment.

    First, we will put the UK’s own defence industry on a war footing.

    One of the central lessons of the war in Ukraine…

    …is that we need deeper stockpiles of munitions…

    …and for industry to be able to replenish them more quickly.

    So today, we’re giving £10bn in munitions to give industry long-term funding certainty…

    …backed by long-term contracts…

    …so they can produce more, be readier to surge capacity…

    …and move to ‘always on’ production, when required.

    From surface-to-air-missiles made in Bolton…

    …to anti-tank weapons in Belfast…

    …we will replenish our stockpiles…

    …all while supporting British jobs right across the Union.

    But it’s not just about investing more – we must invest better.

    For too long, too much of our defence procurement…

    …has been over-complex, over-budget, and over-time.

    So we are making radical reforms to our procurement model…

    …to make sure this new investment delivers value for money.

    And to encourage private sector investment into defence production…

    …I can also announce today that we’re going to put beyond doubt that defence investment…

    …does count towards environmental, social and governance assessments.

    There is nothing more ethical than defending our way of life from those who threaten it.

    Now all of this will put us at the forefront of the global defence industry…

    …allow us to hugely ramp up defence production…

    …and give our armed forces the capability they need to keep us safe.

    But as in so many areas of our lives, technology is changing the face of war.

    So our second immediate priority is innovation and new technology.

    We need to innovate and adapt faster than our adversaries…

    …in space and cyberspace just as much as land, sea, and air.

    Look at Ukraine.

    Many aspects of the war would be familiar to a soldier from WWI or II

    Yet others would be unimaginably different.

    Like the fact that cheap, high-tech, autonomous drones could disable large parts of Russia’s Black Sea fleet.

    The good news is that innovation is already one of our greatest strengths.

    The UK’s own Dragonfire laser directed energy weapon…

    …costs only £10 a shot…

    …yet is accurate enough to hit a £1 coin from a kilometre away.

    And today we’re going further.

    We will increase defence R&D to at minimum to 5% of the defence budget.

    Invest far more in autonomous drones.

    And we will set up a new Defence Innovation Agency.

    So that for the first time, decisions about defence innovation…

    …will be brought together in a single, strategic agency…

    …that will be freed from red tape …

    …and work with the private sector on emerging new technologies.

    Now third, we must support Ukraine for the long term.

    Since the Cold War ended, the freedom of our continent has been based on a simple idea:

    That it is for people to decide the fate of their countries, not foreign armies.

    But allow Putin to win in Ukraine…

    …and that principle of sovereignty would be undermined.

    We would be dragged back to a world…

    …where brute force, rather than the democratic will of free peoples…

    …would shape borders and decide futures.

    And Putin will not stop in Ukraine.

    Win there, and he – and indeed others – will be emboldened.

    He has the desire, if not yet the capacity, to attack other countries in Europe…

    …potentially including NATO allies, who we would be bound to defend…

    …just as they are bound to defend us.

    The costs of failing to support Ukraine now will be far greater than the costs of repelling Putin.

    Because only if he fails will he and other adversaries be deterred.

    That is why the United Kingdom…

    …whose history of standing up to dictators is so much part of our national consciousness…

    …has come together with our allies to stand with Ukraine from the very start.

    Today we will go further.

    We will send Ukraine an additional half a billion pounds , hitting £3 billion of support this year.

    And we’ll provide them with largest-ever package of UK military equipment.

    This will include more than 400 vehicles…

    …4 million rounds of ammunition…

    …60 boats and offshore raiding craft…

    …vital air defences…

    …and long-range precision-guided Storm Shadow missiles.

    And as we make our historic commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP…

    …we’ll move past this stop-start, piecemeal way of backing Ukraine…

    …so that alongside our long-term security guarantee…

    …we are today providing a long-term funding guarantee…

    …of at least the current level of military support to Ukraine, for every year it is needed.

    That is the longest commitment any nation has provided.

    And it shows that Ukraine is not alone, and Ukraine will never be alone.

    A decade ago, as Russian tanks rolled into Crimea…

    …and the fight against ISIL raged across the Middle East…

    …NATO allies came together in Wales, and reached an historic agreement…

    …to increase their defence budgets to 2% of GDP.

    Back then, the UK was one of only 4 countries who did so.

    Today, there are 11.

    And I believe we will look back on this moment…

    …as a similar turning point in European security.

    Because for all that we welcome the news over the weekend…

    …that the US Congress agreed a new package of aid for Ukraine…

    …support that will be indispensable on the frontline…

    …this is not the moment for complacency.

    We cannot keep expecting America to pay any price or bear any burden…

    …if we ourselves are unwilling to make greater sacrifices for our own security.

    So I’m proud that the United Kingdom is increasing our defence spending to £87bn a year…

    …the biggest strengthening of our national defence in a generation…

    …guaranteeing our position as the second largest defence power in NATO, after the US.

    All across Europe…

    …countries like Poland, Germany, Norway and the Baltic nations…

    …are stepping up to take greater responsibility for our own security.

    And I’m confident that whether in months or years…

    …others will follow, too.

    And at this turning point in European security, if 2.5% becomes a new benchmark for all NATO partners to reach…

    …allied defence spending would increase by over £140 billion.

    That would provide a level of safety and security for the British people…

    …and the peoples of all allied nations…

    …that far outstrips anything we could achieve alone.

    To conclude, we did not choose this moment. But it falls to us to meet it.

    In a world of increasing threats, we must show our enemies that we are resolute and determined.

    That their attempts to destabilise our world or redraw its borders by force will fail.

    That with our friends and allies, we will be at the forefront of the defence of the free, democratic world.

    And under my leadership, the United Kingdom will always stand up for our interests…

    …deter our enemies, and defend our values.

  • James Cartlidge – 2024 Speech at the Military Robotics and Autonomous Systems Conference

    James Cartlidge – 2024 Speech at the Military Robotics and Autonomous Systems Conference

    The speech made by James Cartlidge, the Defence Minister, in London on 8 April 2024.

    Good afternoon, everybody. So I’m the Minister for Defence procurement in the UK, I don’t have a speech as such, and what I mean by that is I haven’t got one written by the Civil Service. When I was a Treasury Minister, before I got this job, I went to a conference a bit like this about AI. And there were four Secretary of States speaking at this conference, and what neither of them knew was that they all had the same gag when they started, which is they read their speech, the first paragraph and guess what? As if it had been written by Chat GPT. Once you get to the fourth iteration of that is not as funny as it was the first time. So this hasn’t been written by Chat GPT, this is me because I’m very passionate about this issue because I think autonomy in defence is an amazing opportunity.

    And I’ll explain why but first of all, congratulations to my hosts. Thank you for inviting me because this happens to coincide with a very important day. Today the Ministry of Defence we’ve launched officially our new procurement system, which I’ve put forward. It’s called the Integrated Procurement Model. Now, just to put that in context, when I got this job last April, after Alex Chalk became Lord Chancellor, I replaced him as Minister for Defence Procurement, we were in the middle of a vote in the House of Commons and as I was walking around the lobby voting, my colleagues were coming up to me and they all congratulating me. And each of them in the same phrase would say, but by the way, you’ve got Ajax. So this job is sort of synonymous with one particular project, and I think from day one, I knew we needed to reform procurement. And when I announced the new procurement model on the 28th of February I was very clear that whilst this is about responding to all the concerns that have been brought up over the years, with programmes like Ajax but not just Ajax, Nimrod there is many of them going back over many years’ time.

    The most important reason to reform procurement is much more fundamental than any of those reasons or to do with any of those programmes. And it is simply this that if we as a country, and our allies, as well, are to compete in the future with our adversaries with the way they are investing in defence and technology, we have no choice but to reform procurement. And one of the reasons why I think this new model hopefully will actually take effect not just being launched, but as you will know it has become cultural within MOD, which is something we’ll be working on, it’s fair to say.

    The reason for that is because if we don’t reform procurement, our adversaries will just move too far away from us. And so I wanted to first of all set out what this reform is all about. Because it’s heart is technology, and for me, the most important part of that is around uncrewed systems and also all the technological advances that come with that and the systems that they depend upon. So fundamentally, it’s not about platforms is as you know, it’s about systems, it’s about architectures, about software.

    And so there’s five key features of the new system. And now the first one is fundamental. It’s called an Integrated Procurement Model for a reason.  You’d be aware that in 2021, we announced a new integrated operating concept for the UK Armed Forces, but in announcing that and recognising the reality of modern warfare is an integrated battlespace. We maintain what’s called a delegated procurement model ie. primarily having three frontline services procuring what we describe as bottom up basis whereas to me, if you want an integrated approach, you have to integrated  procurement.

    And so the first point is to have joined up approach to procurement in practice. The bête noire is what we call over programming, this phrase over programming means that essentially, the armed forces are trying to procure more stuff than there is management capacity to buy or frankly, capacity in DE&S and elsewhere to deliver and so the way we have controlled spending in recent years is you move programmes to the right, delay so that literally to control cost. And it’s not unique to MOD, it’s typical of big capital projects. They cost taxpayers a lot of money but it’s a particular issue in defence, because if you delay programmes they become more expensive and question marks that come out about the future those programmes.

    And so one thing I want to see more of is by taking a joined up approach that is pan-defence, you are more likely to make your priorities based on the most important reason which is the threat we face and procuring in a joined up fashion. Okay, so a good example we’re currently working on our munitions plan for the munitions we purchase as a UK MOD over the next 10 years, particularly to replenish our stocks, following the significant gifting to Ukraine. The best way to do that is pan-defence. If we just said to the single services, what do you each need? We end up with an outcome that had a third, a third a third. But to me, that shouldn’t be the priority, the priority is the threats we face as a country and what we need to counter it and I’ll just finish on that point because we’re here to talk about autonomy.

    The best example of that joined up approach is drones actually. So we’ve actually had some fantastic, military entrepreneurs in the MOD we’ve seen within the frontline command some fantastic experimentalism. That has led to some really cutting edge capabilities in the uncrewed space, some of which has been used in Ukraine, as you’ll be aware of.  The problem is, once you take those to the next level, procuring those systems to become part of an integrated force that can be effective in battle, at that point, you do need to have a more integrated approach.

    We cannot just rely on the theory of 1,000 flowers that 1,000 flowers will bloom, as you will know, you have to have common data standards, the ability of your capabilities to talk to each other and to the other services. So that is a really good example of where we need to now move into a more joined up phase which was a key piece of the Uncrewed Strategy that I announced earlier this year.

    The second part is checks and balances. Now, first of all, that’s about oversight. So we will have a new Integrated Design Authority to oversee these changes to make sure they actually happen in reality, if the procurement comes forward, and the requirements don’t enable whatever that system is to talk to the other services, it would be scored negatively, it’d be returned to wherever it came from. I mean, that’s in a nutshell, but I think there’s a really key part checks and balance which is my view as Minister for Defence Procurement, which is that to be as diplomatic as I can, my experience with this past year is that when the requirements come forward to you, the Minister, when the programme comes up to be signed off, shall we say there was something of an expectation that it will be signed off. Whereas I take a slightly different view. And to me, the most important part of this second aspect of checks and balances is what I call the creation of a second opinion.

    Genuinely kicking the tyres on programs at the beginning. So that you ask the right questions and you get the right answer. Because there has been history, which is totally understandable, institutional, as in the UK defence I’m sure it is the same in other countries, in fact I know it is as I have discussed some of my colleagues and my counterparts in other countries, is this sort of what we call the platform presumption. We’ve got the mark five and after ten years we can have the mark six, seven, etc. But what if that’s not the right solution for the threat that we face?

    And so the second opinion… we are very luck in the MOD, we don’t just have the military. We have amazing scientists in the Dstl. We have DE&S with all their interface with industry, which is now being strengthened with something called the DE&S gateway. We basically have this repository of data and information that is extraordinary. And so I want to have a position where when that procurement begins, that big programme, you don’t just have the military assessment of the requirements that you need. You have the challenge of the other experts that we have in our institution, the Dstl and so on telling you how technically viable that is. So for example, that key question, should it actually be an uncrewed system? And this is not a minor subject of conversation.

    We’re talking about fundamentally questioning some assumptions about the capabilities that we presume we’ll probably be procuring in the future and I suspect the military evidence for wargaming from Ukraine, will show that increasingly we are going to be vulnerable, and that we need to do what other countries have started to do, I  have just seen that the the US has just announced they have cancelled a major programme and that would have been crewed and that will now be uncrewed, it was a major reconnaissance programme FARA.

    So the third point is about exportability to checks and balances all joins up with exportability, the FT covered this today, when I was talking to them really saw this as a standout feature, and I think that’s fair, because, again, going back to the first day of the job, you get your first submission, which is what the Civil Service give you as a piece of advice. And first one I had on procurement had about a sentence about exportability in fact, the letter to the Chief Secretary that went with it recommended to procure it. And awaiting my sign-off was that it it didn’t mention prospective benefits of exportability and I think this should be ingrained in acquisition from the beginning.

    And there’s two key reasons for that. The first one is what is the main problem at the moment in defence it’s the resilience of our supply chain, because we had great success with NLAW in Ukraine. We picked up the phone and said give us more of those, okay, if you’re willing to wait years. You’ve got to have that continuous maximum level of aggregate demand, right? Continuous supply chains. That’s why you need to drive exploitability but the other part of it is a bit subtle, but is really key in procurement. I’m always asked the hypothetical question, would your new approach have avoided the Ajax problems. Physically impossible to answer obviously, since we’re not in the period of having a time machine. Which is the if you if you have to consider international requirements, my view it is a good counterbalance to being that terrible phrase overly exquisite, ie having lots of very bespoke requirements. It doesn’t guarantee it  but it’s more likely that. There tends to be a vector between international demand and your ideal domestic UK production. And if you can minimise that, you’ve got a pretty good product because it means you get it into line with the UK and then export it to protect your supply chain.

    So the third point on exportability it is already something I’m pushing. So on the New Medium Helicopter procurement. We’ve got a strong weighting for exportability. The fourth point is about empowering industrial innovation. Now this is really where you guys particularly come in those from industry here something I’m keen to see much more often I hope you’ve been aware of this that we are doing more and more engagement in industry at a classified level.

    So the industry can understand our requirements much earlier in the process. And in turn, we can pick up the feedback from what’s happening in the real world. And I hope that what’s happening with all these people talking is very interesting. So I’ll give you a good example, the most uplifting experience I’ve had as a Minister for Defence Procurement was last October when I went see a UK company developing a drone being used in Ukraine. While I was there, they were receiving feedback from the frontline. And they were then spirally responding to that within days.

    Now when we used to have people coming in and saying Minister this thing is going to be delayed another 27 years or whatever. And you see that sort of spiral development in the flesh. It’s quite something to behold especially because the capability is highly effective and costs a tiny fraction of the thing I was talking about that’s going to be delayed many years, we start to really think about whether you’ve got the right approach for procurement and it is quite revolutionary what is happening.

    So I always have a situation where the UK industry feels close to MOD. It doesn’t mean close as in the bad way of being close it’s a really rich relationship based on this feedback with the data from the frontline  and from Ukraine and so on, and what is becoming possible what is becoming necessary and rapid development of products on the back of it.

    And the fifth and final one is about having spiral development by default. Spiral development wonderful phrase as the FT said to me yesterday, it’s actually really sort of very common place in the corporate world. The phrase is not commonplace in defence and that’s where the change needs to be made.

    What does it really mean? So we say well, if you want to go get 60 to 80% of your requirements instead 100%. Instead, of having IOC and FOC long standing ways of measuring your progress, we just want to add minimum deployable product. Basically, you measure the effectiveness of the product, the point at which it is able to be used, and I think that’s a really good way of measuring.

    So we talked about the military, I have got written answers and I look at them at them if this is crazy. That were my opponents asked me the IOC and FOC all of our programmes, and quite a few of them are in use. They’re being used and we’re saying they’ve only been achieved IOC if they’re being used by military but there’s quite a good example in our missile systems.

    And I think it just shows the point that that’s because we’re focusing on the perfect thing to achieve. Where we want to get into service quickly and spiral upgrade it. It does happen, but it’s not cultural. That’s the key point we want to become the cultural assumption in Defence because there will be programmes like nuclear submarines, which will not conform to this approach. By definition, they’ll still take many years, absolutely necessary. Highly unlikely so there is still going to be a big programme which is an exception sitting outside the norm but the fact is, from today through the new procurement model in defence, we have time limits – three years for software, five years for hardware.

    So I said in my speech to the House, on our Mobile Fires Platform which is our engineering artillery capability. It will be procured within five years, which in many ways didn’t sound that quick but it is as you all know compared to what’s gone on before on our major platforms etc.

    Just to say and so what does this mean for uncrewed and robotic systems and so on. And I think this approach I’m outlining is all about technology. We have this thing called the Equipment Plan. What I mean is we have 10-year programme, right, which everyone is focused on. And yet, we are told that the same time that we could be at war in two or three years, we’re in a pre-war environment. And we’re still focused on this platform iteration model. Well, we’re gonna get more ships. Now those ships will take nine years to build, but you know, we’re just gonna get more ships. That’s what we need to do for the country. Whereas to me, always have to do is why this is so important. And why you’re meeting today, we’ve got to focus increasingly on how you make your existing platforms and people and capabilities more lethal, more survivable.

    And also the platform you’re building out in the water and in the air, in a couple of years. That’s where the focus in my view needs to be. And if you do that, it is conceivable that some of the acquisition you presumed to be doing later in the Equipment Plan you believe to happen.

    Now I can appreciate this is not conventional thinking but that’s actually what’s happening in Ukraine. So it’s telling us we need to start focusing on what sort of weapons we can bring forward rapidly, what sort of weapon systems what sort of IT systems to support them. There will be capabilities we have today, which we will use if we were in conflict imminently where there are it upgrades, software AI, that will make them more lethal and more survivable.

    So I think to me, that’s a big part of the focus. That doesn’t mean you don’t still have the longer programs that take time to do that. It’s just again, where’s your cultural focus? Because I would put it to you now , where do we think the focus still is institutionally in defence? That’s a fair question. And I think that has to shift and it’s starting to shift.

    I will finish on this broader point about where to next move on uncrewed. I actually think this is an amazing opportunity. When people say to James, brilliant, it’s just, it’s never gonna happen in practice. Too good to be true. It is happening in practice. I talked about the drone company. There’s many other examples where we have SMEs who are coming forward with really cutting edge stuff and rapidly, particularly software companies. Obviously, this sort of approach is standard in software. Constant upgrade. We all know that sometimes it’s incredibly irritating, especially with a legacy laptop or IT system.

    But it is standard practice in much of industry and we need to adapt it into the culture and DNA of defence.

    We’re not talking just be clear about Urgent Operational Requirements. This is where you are literally not just on the cusp of more why situation you are preparing to go out to wherever and there are things you need to do to your vehicles to your kit, iterations that means you can withstand whatever that threat is. This is different to that. This is about having taking advantage of the pace of innovation that’s out there. The UK could have much more survivable and meaningful capability within a relatively small amount of time, cost-effectively, which should be stressed.

    So I think it’s incredibly exciting people that are involved in this industry. I think that we are on the cusp of a significant pivot to much greater use of uncrewed systems. I mean, it’s made me think that’s an obvious thing to say. Some debate on if uncrewed overhyped or underhyped. I have the privilege of knowing what’s happening in theatre, but also Just imagine what it could do, in the hands of a top tier military. The point I’m making is really developing cohesively integrated battlespace, it could do incredible things, it can add mass.

    My colleagues, my parliamentary colleagues will stand up in the House and they want us to commit to more ships more personnel, more aircraft etc. But how will the traditional platforms cope going forward?  Whereas we can bring out new drones, new ground effects and in particular in maritime relatively quickly, it’s already happening. We all know what’s happened in the Black Sea. That’s an incredible strategic victory for Ukraine, which is unfortunate, underplayed because of the coverage understandably for what is happening on land, but it is an incredible effect they’ve achieved as a country of UK we are very well placed literally the best placed country other than Ukraine to learn the lessons from what is happening in this very day and has been happening in that battle space in the uncrewed systems and you know, we need the maritime capability coalition with Norway we need the drone coalition with Latvia.

    This is learning lessons in real time. There is no better test lab than that. We as a country have got to take that opportunity to drive proper embracing of uncrewed systems and all standard systems, the stuff that goes with it dealing with electronic warfare, which is all pervading in Ukraine, as you all know, means that our armed forces can fight the fight that is going to happen today. And if we do that, I think we build prosperity for our industry and greater security for our people. Thank you very much for your time.

  • David Cameron – 2024 Speech on the Future Role of the NATO Alliance

    David Cameron – 2024 Speech on the Future Role of the NATO Alliance

    The speech made by David Cameron, the Foreign Secretary, on 3 April 2024.

    Great to be here, in this house that has many memories for me as you can imagine, when I think of all those European Councils, where I spent late nights and early mornings, and it’s very good to be back.

    Seventy five years. NATO is 75 years old. I am 57 years old. But I hope there’s more than just the symmetry of that that I bring to this discussion. I played my part in NATO’s development and am very proud I chaired the Cardiff Summit in 2014, when I think at that stage, just 3 countries met the 2% spending floor, not ceiling, floor, and now we’re in a situation where over 20 countries out of 32 meet that target and NATO is stronger.

    I always feel that NATO wasn’t something I had to learn about or understand: I grew up with it. I was born and brought up between Greenham Common, where the cruise missiles were stationed, and Aldermaston, where our nuclear programme was centred. The first countries I visited as an adult were the Soviet Union and Eastern Union. So I never needed reminding or understanding of the vital importance of NATO in our national life.

    And it’s been extraordinary, having supported it all through its quiet years – years in which some people whether it had a functioning brain – I never lost faith in NATO. I’ve always set the faith in NATO and it’s great to be celebrating its 75th anniversary. And the 75th anniversary when it is so much stronger today than it has been for years.

    And today of course, at the NATO Foreign Ministers’ meeting we welcomed Sweden for the first time as a full participant. And to bring 2 countries, Finland and Sweden, into NATO, both so highly capable militarily, so financially strong, so knowledgeable about the region, and their military obligations definitely makes NATO stronger.

    Why is NATO so successful? What is next for NATO? What will truly determine its success or failure in the years ahead?

    Why so successful? You’d have to back to 1948 and something Ernest Bevin said, he said: ‘decisions we take now will be vital to the future peace of the world’. That was absolutely prophetic and right. At the heart of NATO’s success is the incredible simplicity of Article Five: an attack on one is an attack on all is something all participants and all people could understand.

    And of course, it was combined with that sense when it was founded of a clear and growing threat. And Most of NATO’s life has had a clear threat; we certainly have that today. Its success is clearly based on its continued expansion.

    What is next for NATO? While it’s clear NATO is not a participant in the conflict in Ukraine, the outcome of that war what happens in Ukraine is, in my view, absolutely vital to the future of Ukraine, and that is why one of the reasons why Britain so strongly supports Ukraine struggle.

    I was meeting earlier with the Slovak Foreign Minister and I pointed out something that not a lot of people know, that my closest relative who was in politics, Duff Cooper, who resigned in 1938 because of the Munich Conference and the decision to dismember Czechoslovakia. To me what we face today is as simple as that. We have a tyrant in Europe who is trying to redraw borders by force. You can appease that approach or you can confront that approach, which is undoubtedly the right thing to do, to confront.

    And that is what we’re doing by giving Ukraine such strong support. I see with Ukraine 2 futures that are open to NATO, to Europe and countries like Britain: there is a future where we support Ukraine, where Putin does not win in Ukraine, where Ukraine recovers its territory and is capable of having a just peace.

    That future is an incredibly bright one for Britain, for Europe, for NATO – it’s a future where NATO will be strong, everyone will see the strength of its alliance, everyone will recognise Ukraine should be and will be a part of NATO, NATO’s capability will grow and people will see that we in the West are capable of standing up to a threat of this magnitude.

    But there is another future, for NATO, the West, Britain and that is one where we allow Ukraine to fail and Putin to succeed; and the celebrations will be held in Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and North Korea. That is a very bleak future: not only because I believe other European countries would be at risk but I think all around the world people will look around and wonder how willing to stand up for our Allies, how reliable we were as an Ally.

    And even, the absolute key to NATO of Article 5, Allies in Europe will start looking at each other and wondering how much they can really trust each other, when they said they were going to stand up for each other and oppose aggression. I think the biggest test for European nations is this issue of Ukraine and that is why it is my number one priority as Foreign Secretary and something that this government is giving so much effort and thought and resources to.

    But of course it’s not the only threat and it’s not the only issue that NATO has to face in terms of what is next. we face an incredibly dangerous and difficult and disputation relational world with so many conflicts. We have the instability in the Middle East instability in Africa, more conflicts in Africa than perhaps we’ve had for the last 40 years.

    And of course, we had a timely reminder last week with the issue of Chinese, the cyber attacks on great hardware blocks, that we face threats, not only in terms of the Russian threat, but also the threat that we face, instability to our South and in the Indo-Pacific reaching into our own region. NATO has a role to play in addressing all of those threats. The UK is determined to support all the NATO strategies in dealing with those threats.

    The final point I wanted to make is, what will determine the success or failure of NATO? There are some simple, Treasury-like technical answers to that: success will depend on more and more countries reaching 2% or more countries seeing 2% as a floor and not a ceiling and we have seen such great progress there.

    A large part of the answer will be how capable NATO is of modernising all our armed forces and making sure their compatibility interoperability. A lot of NATO success will depend on when we make Ukraine a member, with its professional and capable armed forces.

    But I would say the biggest determinant of success or failure goes back to what I said at the start: I grew up believing in NATO because it had a relevance to my life. If you came of age politically in the 1980s, you could see the importance of the solidarity that NATO brought, you could see the importance of the strong defence that kept Europe and Britain safe. But can we actually say that, about future generations, you haven’t grown up with that knowledge but have grown up in a different situation?

    And I think we have to win the argument for NATO all over again with a new generation. A generation that can see yes, the threat from Russia. We need to go back to a foundational argument, which is this, that fundamentally the greatness of NATO is that it allows countries to choose their own future.

    When I looked at my colleagues from Latvia, Lithuania Estonia, when I look at Radek Sikorski from people whose countries who chose to join NATO after the fall of the Iron Curtain, NATO membership is really what gave them the ability to make a choice about the sort of country they would be and the values they would follow.

    That’s an incredibly strong values-based argument that a younger generation can understand and see. I just think the one figure to back it up: when the Iron Curtain fell, Poland recovered its ability to govern itself and its economy was 3 times the size of that of Belarus; today it’s 10 times the size.

    There’s no reason why Ukraine is so many times poorer than Poland, very similar countries, very similar parts of the world. It’s the ability NATO gives to allow countries to choose to be democracies, to choose to have rights and to choose to have the rule of law, to adopt an open-market trading system and form those sorts of relations with other countries.

    That’s the argument I think we need to make today and that is the argument that can help us to win all over again the backing for NATO, that it will need, as we ask our publics to fund and support the defence budgets and NATO budgets, as we ask NATO to do more, not just in supporting what we’re doing in UKR but also supporting what we need to do in a more unstable and more unsafe words.

    So I feel more confident as a 57 year-old supporting a 75 year-old that I’m backing a winner: it’s been a winner for 75 years, it’s been it’s been the most successful defensive alliance in the history of the world and if we back it financially, and back it in its expansion and also back it with values-based arguments, there’s no reason it won’t continue have another 75 years of extraordinary success.

  • James Cartlidge – 2024 Speech at the International Military Helicopter Conference

    James Cartlidge – 2024 Speech at the International Military Helicopter Conference

    The speech made by James Cartlidge, the Minister for Defence Procurement, on 27 February 2024.

    On the subject of medium helicopters as it were, as you know, they’ve been involved in almost every operation of significance for decades, ferrying troops and supplies under fire in the Falklands, Iraq and Afghanistan and evacuating casualties, helping NATO restore peace to the Balkans, saving countless lives with humanitarian aid from Mozambique to the Caribbean, and moving our diplomats around Kabuk when travel by road was too dangerous. And they have been in a constant state of readiness in a counter-terrorism role.

    Now over the decades, UK Governments have commissioned, procured and upgraded numerous platforms including many iconic names that you’re all very familiar with, from the Scout in the 1950s, the Sea King in the 1960s, the Lynx, Puma and Gazelle in the 1970s to the more recent Wildcat and Merlin, and I’ve had the privilege of flying in a number of them, recently aboard one of our Wildcats flying to Yeovilton to see how artificial intelligence has improved their support and crucially, their availability. Very recently I visited RAF Valley to fly in the Jupiter training helicopter and actually learned while I was there this really pleasing fact that, for the first time in a long time, we now have more pupils training than in hold, which is, as you know, one of the accumulated issues from the pandemic which led to significant holes. So that’s really positive,

    But a particularly memorable flight for me was last summer between Schipol and Den Helder for what’s called the Navy Day in the Netherlands. Is anyone here from the Netherlands? I don’t know if you were there, but anyway, I had an interesting ride with the Dutch Marines in the NH-90. So we’re just flying about 2,000 feet. I was in that seat by the door. You have a little sort of X-strap. And the marine said, ‘Minister you want to put your plastic glasses back on. I’m gonna give you a close up view of the offshore wind farms’, and he opened the door. All I can say is if you’ve ever experienced that, it’s very windy a few thousand feet up. The thought that went through my mind was ‘I think the Prime Minister is going to have to have another by-election very quickly’. It was very windy.

    Turning to procurement and the main subject, so when my predecessor took the decision in 2021, to invest in the next generation of medium helicopter power – the efficiencies that would come from a versatile single platform were clear for all to see in terms of procurement, training, contract support, and maintenance. Fast forward to today and we’re at the next stage of that process. I’m pleased to announce that I’m about to issue the paperwork that will initiate an invitation to negotiate with all three candidate suppliers of our next generation New Medium Helicopter, Airbus Helicopters UK, Leonardo Helicopters UK, and Lockheed Martin UK.

    All three companies have shown their platforms can meet the different needs of our Armed Forces, and you’ll note, listed alphabetically without any prejudice, all good competitor companies. So later, you can hear more about the process and other procurement programmes from Commodore Woodard, our SRO, senior responsible owner for delivering the New Medium Helicopter programme. And I know Commodore Woodard shares my determination to ensure that this programme is a beacon of smart procurement because as you will discover quite soon hopefully we are right in the middle of a very significant form of defence acquisition in the UK.

    So this will be built around affordability and more timely and thorough challenge. Future proofed by factoring adaptability and spiral development at the concept stage. And above all, a procurement programme that implements the lessons from Ukraine which is quite simply that we must close vulnerabilities in our supply chains by strengthening UK defence skills and production. We want to expand on each of these elements. When we first announced the programme, we quickly put in train a pre-qualification process to select credible candidates ahead of the outline business case stage. This has delivered significant efficiencies for both government and industry.

    We’ve also adapted our approach as a result of timely and robust internal decisions, ditching our original plan to include helicopters for our bases in Cyprus and Brunei within this programme, and instead announcing our intention to acquire six Airbus H155 helicopters to avoid unnecessary over-speccing, and overspending on platforms that were never intended operating in a war zone. In short, making a significant saving without the inefficiencies of diversifying our existing helicopter fleet.

    Another important feature of our Medium Helicopter programme will be our ability to spirally develop these platforms – we will order largely off the shelf models with open system architecture that we can spiral with enhanced capabilities to meet different operational needs or to accommodate new innovations, meaning our new medium helicopter will be adaptable and future proof.

    The final element that reflects our smarter approach to procurement is our UK industrial contribution consideration. This is a points based decision making process that we have designed to favour suppliers who do more to strengthen the UK defence industrial base – which should account for 15% of our overall procurement decision, we will reward those who invest in the UK’s rotary wing design industry, a critical national capability and sector and it will advantage those platforms with export potential by using an export criteria that is worth 20% of the UK industrial contribution weighting. This matters because exports sustain UK manufacturing and high value jobs in the UK and they strengthen and sustain our indigenous skills base, which is essential to building resilience into our defence sector and national security and critical if we are to remain a global player in the sector for decades to come.

    Our New Medium Helicopter programme is one of the very first to have this pro-export component built into our selection criteria. As Minister for Defence Procurement, I will ensure exportability becomes a factor in all relevant new procurement programmes. We’ll be saying more on that soon. But that formula of the design requirement plus export requirements equals, if you like, a combination of the quality of work we want to see in the UK, plus its sustainability for the long term.

    And I will also work to ensure that an expectation of spiral development also becomes a default in all relevant programmes. Our procurement must have the dynamism and flexibility to respond to this era of seismic technological change. That means being open minded to all that tech can offer. No platform is sacred.

    So last week, I launched our new uncrewed systems strategy at the headquarters of a successful UK drone company, Malloy Aeronautics, they gave a demonstration of their T-150 drone, which has proven extremely effective delivering supplies to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, including supplying Ukrainian Marines on the other side of the Dnipro River. Underlining that they really are in action on the front line. And uncrewed systems like the Malloy drone are transforming warfare and they will continue to shape it in ways we are barely able to conceive. To make sure we keep ahead of our adversaries, we are building a renewed relationship between government and industry, turning intelligence from the battlefield into solutions in the factory and a competitive edge for our forces in weeks, days, even minutes.

    Now, obviously in lots of countries here some people may be sceptical about the speed of procurement as all countries face the challenge in this area. But my most insightful visit I’d say, as the Minister for Defence Procurement I’ve visited many bases and companies, was to a UK SME called Callen-Lenz, based in the southwest, who were spiralling a drone for use in Ukraine. And while I was there we had feedback from the frontline and the next day they put those changes in place. As Minister of Defence Procurement, you do not normally see that sort of turnaround in learning from procurement. That is the era we are now in – rapid spiral development. And I believe that taking that into account the recent decisions of the US to cancel their FARA programme was in large partly a reflection of this new reality and aligns with our own thinking.

    Procurement must be smart, agile, and responsive, ready to pivot and adapt to the changing nature of threats and to accommodate war-winning innovations. That’s why our next generation medium lift helicopter will deliver a Swiss Army Knife platform, future proofed and procured in a way to give the UK Armed Forces and our defence sector maximum clout and flexibility, a 21st century platform delivering on our modernisation agenda that can meet multiple needs now, and be easily adapted in the future, procured through a process that incentivises investment in the UK, which will deliver high value jobs, high value exports and help make us more secure. I look forward to your questions.

  • James Heappey – 2024 Statement on Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy Eligibility for Afghan special force

    James Heappey – 2024 Statement on Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy Eligibility for Afghan special force

    The statement made by James Heappey, the Minister for Armed Forces, in the House of Commons on 1 February 2024.

    I am grateful for the opportunity to update the House on developments relating to the Afghan relocations and assistance policy scheme, and to answer the specific question raised by the hon. Gentleman in relation to former members of commando force 333 and Afghan territorial force 444.

    Many colleagues across the House are passionate advocates for applicants to the ARAP scheme—whether they served shoulder to shoulder with them in Afghanistan, or represent applicants and their family members who are residents in their constituencies. We owe a debt of gratitude to those brave individuals who served for, with, or alongside our armed forces in support of the UK mission in Afghanistan. Defence is determined to honour the commitments we made under the ARAP scheme, which is why we have robust checks in place and regularly review processes and procedures.

    Although many former members of the Afghan specialist units have been found eligible under ARAP and safely relocated to the UK with their families, a recent review of processes around eligibility decisions demonstrated instances of inconsistent application of the ARAP criteria in certain cases. The issue relates to a tranche of applications from former members of Afghan specialist units, including members of CF 333 and ATF 444—known as the Triples. Having identified this issue through internal processes, we must now take necessary steps to ensure that the criteria are applied appropriately to all those individuals.

    As such, I can confirm that the Ministry of Defence will undertake a reassessment of all eligibility decisions made for applications with credible claims of links to the Afghan specialist units. The reassessment will be done by a team independent of the one that made the initial eligibility decisions on the applications. The team will review each case thoroughly and individually. A written ministerial statement to that effect was tabled this morning, and I commend it to colleagues. A further “Dear colleague” letter will follow by close of business tomorrow.

    It is the case, however, that ARAP applications from this cohort present a unique set of challenges for eligibility decision making. Some served in their units more than two decades ago, and some while the Afghan state apparatus was still in its infancy or yet to come into existence all together. It is also the case that they reported directly into the Government of Afghanistan, meaning that we do not hold comprehensive employment or payment records in the same way as we do for other applicants.

    I fully understand the depth of feeling that ARAP evokes across this place and beyond. I thank Members from across the House for their ongoing advocacy and support for ARAP. We have that same depth of feeling in the MOD and in Government, and we will now work quickly to make sure that the decisions are reviewed, and changed if that is necessary.

    Luke Pollard

    Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question.

    The Triples Afghan special forces, trained and funded by the UK, are some of the top targets for Taliban reprisals. Around 200 Triples face imminent deportation from Pakistan to Afghanistan, and at least six members of the Triples are reported to have been murdered by the Taliban since the withdrawal from Kabul. Ministers have allowed media speculation to build for almost a week before setting out to Parliament today the Government’s plan to U-turn and look again at the applications.

    The Minister highlighted inconsistencies in processing the applications—failures, flaws. How was that allowed to happen on his watch? How long will the reviews take, and what new information will be factored in? Tragically, today’s decision could be too late for many. Does the Minister know how many of the Triples who were wrongly denied support have already been deported to Afghanistan, tortured or killed? What conversations has he had with Pakistan to halt deportations of those who could now be granted sanctuary? There is no time to waste.

    The least the Triples deserve is clarity over ARAP policy, but for months a public spat has played out between the Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and the Minister for Armed Forces. We should all remember that the people who matter here are those Afghans who have been left in limbo, fearing for their lives and their futures. That is why clarity matters. Britain’s moral duty to assist Afghans is felt most fiercely by those in the UK forces who served alongside them, many of whom sit on both sides of the House. British personnel who have offered references to former Triples say that they were never even contacted by the Ministry of Defence. Many of their ARAP applications were denied. Will such basic errors happen again, or will that be reviewed properly?

    The British public do not understand why Afghan special forces personnel who served and fought alongside our troops and who are eligible for safety have not yet received sanctuary here. Will the Minister now sort this out?

    James Heappey

    I know that the hon. Gentleman, who has been advocating for some cases and is as passionate about the matter as anybody, will feel aggrieved, as will many colleagues around the House. The responsibility of any Minister is to own any failure of process that happens in their Department, and I accept that responsibility.

    The reality is that these are very difficult decisions to make. The hon. Gentleman said that the Triples were funded by the UK Government. That is not entirely accurate; they were funded as a donor alongside many other donors, into the Government of Afghanistan, who funded the units. As he will well know from colleagues on his own Benches who commanded units that worked closely with the Triples, top-up payments were made in order to generate loyalty and, frankly, to avoid the Triples being poached by other coalition partners, which had similar forces of their own.

    The records of those top-up payments were very ad hoc. I take my responsibilities for accuracy to the House seriously, and I can tell the hon. Gentleman in all seriousness that we have looked for employment records and none of those ad hoc records of additional payments is available to us. We have spoken to colleagues who have experience of these matters in the House and beyond, to ask for any records that they have, but even then a lot of the records produced are those that are put together by charities advocating for the Triples, rather than contemporary records of those top-up payments.

    The reality is that whatever the challenges have been, some decisions were made in an inconsistent way. That is why they must be reviewed. We will aim to get the review done as quickly as possible—we anticipate that it will take around 12 weeks. Before that, we need to put in place the people who will do the review, who will be independent of everything that has gone before. In the first instance, it will be a review of the robustness of the decisions themselves, and where it finds that decisions were not robust, we will, of course, seek new information both from the applicant and from colleagues in the House who have advocated for them.

    The shadow Minister makes some good points about what this means for people who are in Pakistan. It is impossible to say who, of those who were not already in the pipeline as approved applicants, has been deported. We do not track that, so I cannot answer his specific question but, of course, we will alert the Government of Pakistan to those who are included within the review, so that they can enjoy the same protection from deportation as those who have already been approved and are awaiting their onward move to the UK.

    The shadow Minister necessarily points to the politics and the alleged disagreement among Conservative Members —that is the nature of his role—but I am simply not motivated by such things. The reality is that we are trying our best to bring as many people to the UK from Afghanistan as possible. Some decisions are relatively straightforward, because we hold the employment records, but others are far more complicated. Although there have undoubtedly been some decisions that are not robust and need to be reviewed, I put on record that the people involved in making those decisions, across the MOD, have been working their hardest and doing their best. I stand up for their service and for what they have done, and I take responsibility for their shortcomings.

  • Grant Shapps – 2024 Speech at the World Defense Show

    Grant Shapps – 2024 Speech at the World Defense Show

    The speech made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Defence, in Saudi Arabia on 4 February 2024.

    60 years ago, the skies above Riyadh bore witness to a remarkable demonstration as a supersonic aircraft shot into the atmosphere at twice the speed of sound.

    Just two years later and 40 of those iconic English Electric Lightning jets were heading to Saudi Arabia where they became as revered an icon of the skies over here as they were back in the UK.

    Yet that special flight also seemed to send our own partnership into the stratosphere.

    1964 saw the first British military mission to the Saudi Arabian National Guard, and 14 years after that we brought across a project team which has been supporting you with advice, information and communications service ever since.

    So that one pioneering flight demonstrated ours is a partnership built from the strongest of frames. An understanding of the value of Defence, an appreciation of the merits of innovation, and a desire to keep working together.

    And how fitting then that 60 years on, here at this fantastic World Defense Show, we are once again celebrating a partnership that’s putting on the afterburners.

    Not only can we reflect on a mutual commitment to combat air that’s taken us from Lightning, to Tornado, to Typhoon – with hundreds of UK military personnel now committed to Saudi programmes.

    But we have also stepped up the pace on the ground as well, with our Defence Cooperation Plan catalysing deeper cooperation between our Land Forces.

    However, my purpose in attending this great exhibition is not to reminisce about our past, nor even to reflect on our present, it is to talk about our future.

    Because if the incredible story of the Lightning tells us anything, it’s that when an opportunity arises in our mutual interests, we know how to seize it together.

    And frankly, when I look around me, I see opportunity abounds.

    Yours is a nation buzzing with energy. Creating new cities out of sand, redefining sport by hosting the World Cup in E-sports. Spearheading the charge towards a greener future.

    Yet if there’s one event that seemed to encapsulate your sense of ambition, it was what happened last year, when Saudi fighter pilot and astronaut, Ali Al-Qarni, and his crew member, Rayyanah Barnawi, became the first two Saudi astronauts to visit the International Space Station.

    Proof – if it were needed – that you are nation in fast forward.

    You’ve bottled lightning, and now you’re accelerating towards the future with increasing velocity.

    The UK wants to be on that journey with you. But there’s only one thing that can pull us back down to earth.

    Instability.

    For decades our prosperity and progress has been underpinned by the international rules-based order, yet today we live in a far more dangerous world. Our once reliable order is under threat from the likes of big state aggressors and from rogue states, whose terrorist proxies are hell-bent on destroying our freedom and damaging our wealth.

    So now is the time to tighten our ties.

    How? First by working together – in the words of your conference, to be equipped for tomorrow.

    Once upon a time we showcased a jet in your skies. Today we’ve brought more than 30 of our finest UK firms to your show, including a Wildcat helicopter, delivered by one of our Royal Air Force’s A400M transport aircraft.

    Demonstrating our skills not just in the air, but on land, sea, cyber and space. Our delegation are experts in power and engines, in critical components and complex weapons, in state-of-the-art surveillance and next generation electronic warfare.

    Our people know everything there is to know in mine counter-measures and military suspension and durable materials, 3D sensors, sonars, and uncrewed systems.

    But my second point is that we are looking for much more than a transient transaction.

    We want to build an even deeper industrial partnership.

    Saudi Arabia quite rightly wants to develop its own defence industrial base – and we want to help you get there – developing mutually beneficial capability programmes to support regional security.

    Already we have a deep industrial partnership stretching across air, land, sea and cyber.

    To take just one example, BAE’s workforce here in Saudi Arabia is almost 75 per cent Saudi.

    Which brings me to my third and final point: Both our nations share pressing strategic priorities.

    We both seek to calm conflicts. We both desire de-escalation. And even as Saudi Arabia aims for the stars, so its influence on terra firma is increasing too.

    It has a critical role to play in this region as interlocutors, as mediators and as leaders.

    So I see us doing more together to help shore up our international rules-based order. Doing more to ensure adherence to international humanitarian law. Doing more to prevent a breakdown in regional security, so we guarantee the safety and security of all people.

    Sixty years ago, we brought Lightning to this great Kingdom and helped transform our partnership.

    Sixty years on, we’re now looking to elevate our relationship to even greater heights.

    I, for one, am a strong believer that Lightning can strike twice.

  • Grant Shapps – 2024 Speech on Defending Britain from a More Dangerous World

    Grant Shapps – 2024 Speech on Defending Britain from a More Dangerous World

    The speech made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Defence, at Lancaster House in London on 15 January 2024.

    Thirty-five years ago, Margaret Thatcher gave a short speech here in Lancaster House.

    She spoke of her optimism about the changes taking place between East and West. Barely two weeks later the Berlin Wall fell.

    It was the dawn of a new era. Existential threats were banished. And a new global feel good factor spread to Defence.

    This was the age of the peace dividend. The notion that while our defences should be maximised at times of tension they could be minimised in times of peace.

    Conflict didn’t disappear of course. But with no great power menacing the continent, peace gave the impression of being just around the corner.

    Yet, not everyone got the memo. In fact our adversaries were mobilising.

    The belligerent autocratic state was making a comeback – having got away with the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, Putin launched his brutal invasion of Ukraine eight years later.

    And as Russia continues its illegal campaign in Ukraine, China is assessing whether the West loses its patience.

    Today, Russia and China have been joined by new nuclear, and soon to be nuclear, powers.

    North Korea promising to expand its own nuclear arsenal.

    And then there is Iran, whose enriched uranium is up to 83.7%, a level at which there is no civilian application.

    Back in the days of the Cold War there remained a sense that we were dealing with rational actors.

    But these new powers are far more unstable, and irrational.

    Can we really assume the strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction that stopped wars in the past will stop them in future, when applied to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard or North Korea?

    I am afraid we cannot.

    Particularly since there is now another new worrying consideration: Our adversaries are now more connected with each other.

    For example, we have seen how Iranian proxies are causing havoc from Israel to the Red Sea.

    That Russia has what the two countries describe as a “no limits partnership” with China – with whom they conduct regular joint exercises.

    Meanwhile, Putin is relying on Iranian drones and North Korean ballistic missiles to fuel his illegal bombardment in Ukraine.

    With friends like these, the world is becoming more dangerous and has done in recent years.

    But the other threats that plagued the start of the 21st century haven’t gone away.

    The spectre of terrorism and threats from non-state actors, as October 7 showed, still haunts the civilised world.

    Put it all together, and these combined threats risk tearing apart the rules-based international order – established to keep the peace after the Second World War.

    Today’s world then, is sadly far more dangerous.

    With the UN reporting that we are facing the highest number of violent conflicts since the Second World War.

    Now some argue these threats are not existential to the UK.

    And yet, what happens elsewhere, quickly happens here.

    In the past few years we’ve seen terror attacks on the streets of London, attempted assassinations in Salisbury, theft of Intellectual Property, attempted interference in our political processes, a cost-of-living crisis, brought to you by Putin, that’s hurting families here at home.

    And now, our trade. 90 per cent of which comes by sea, is the target of terrorists.

    Proving that not only do our adversaries have the intent to target us but they have a widening array of weapons with which to wreak havoc.

    In our online world our adversaries don’t need to jump in a tank board a sub or strap into a fighter jet to hurt us.

    Cyber warfare simply means hacking into our networks and watching the economic carnage unfold.

    Last year, almost a third of businesses in the UK suffered a cyber breach or attack. And the total cost to the UK economy runs into billions.

    We know significant numbers of these attacks come from Russia and China where they are also developing satellite killing technology, capable of degrading us from space.

    Even mass migration can be cynically used against us as a weapon of war, as Poland, Norway, and Finland have been experiencing.

    In other words, nation states plus non-state actors with greater connections between them plus more creative weapons all adds up to more trouble for the world.

    Over the last decade this government has made great strides to turn the Defence tanker around.

    The refreshes of the Integrated Review and Defence Command Paper have been instrumental in ensuring Britain is defended in this more dangerous world.

    We’ve uplifted our defence spending – investing billions into modernising our Armed Forces and bringing in a raft of next generation capabilities, from new aircraft carriers to F35s; from new drones to Dreadnought submarines; from better trained troops; to the creation of a national cyber force.

    And when the world needed us, we have risen to the moment.

    Giving Ukraine our unwavering support and galvanising others to their cause, including with our biggest ever funding package, announced last week.

    Taking action, we work to stamp out the global ambitions of Daesh.

    We’ve acted at the forefront of global responses to maintain regional stability after October 7th by sending a Royal Navy Task Group, a company of Royal Marines, surveillance planes and lifesaving aid to Gaza.

    And taking a lead role within global forces to protect freedom of navigation in the Red Sea.

    Not only that but we’ve strengthened Britain’s place in the world with expanded partnerships from the Gulf to the Indo-Pacific.

    We’re playing a major part in stirring the West into a renewed commitment to defence, using our 2014 NATO summit in Newport to bring Alliance nations together to stop the rot, by committing to spending 2 per cent of GDP on Defence.

    Today, for the very first time this government is spending more than £50bn a year on Defence in cash terms, more than ever before.

    And we have made the critical decision to set out our aspiration to reach 2.5% of GDP spent on defence.

    And as we stabilise and grow the economy, we will continue to strive to reach it as soon as possible.

    But now is the time for all allied and democratic nations across the world to do the same.

    And ensure their defence spending is growing.

    Because, as discussed, the era of the peace dividend is over.

    In five years’ time we could be looking at multiple theatres involving Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

    Ask yourselves – looking at today’s conflicts across the world – is it more likely that the number grows, or reduces?

    I suspect we all know the answer – it’s likely to grow. So, 2024 must mark an inflexion point.

    For Ukraine, this will be a year when the fate of their nation may be decided.

    For the world, this will be the greatest democratic year in history with nearly half of the world’s population going to the polls.

    And for the UK it must also be a moment to decide the future of our national defences. The choice is stark.

    Some people, especially on the left, have a tendency to talk Britain down.

    They believe Britain can no longer have the power to influence world events.

    That we should somehow shrink into ourselves and ignore what’s happening beyond our shores.

    I passionately believe these unpatriotic, Britain belittling doom-mongers are simply wrong.

    Their way would lead us sailing blindly into an age of autocracy. So we must make a different choice.

    And the history of our great island nation shows us the way.

    Britain has often accomplished the seemingly impossible before. Our history is littered with moments when we faced down the threat and triumphed.

    But looking ahead, we are in a new era and we must be prepared to deter our enemies, lead our allies, and defend our nation.

    In terms of deterrence, it’s about the UK gaining a strategic advantage over our enemies.

    The foundation of that advantage is, of course, our nuclear enterprise.

    At a time of mounting nuclear danger, our continuous at sea deterrent provides the ultimate protection.

    And that’s why we are spending around £31bn to bring in next generation Dreadnought submarines and upgrade our deterrent.

    In a more contested world, we need to bring that same goal of deterrence to our conventional forces – so we have made modernisation a critical priority.

    Taking the long-term capability decisions we need to transform our Armed Forces into a formidable deterrent.

    Enabling them to maintain the UK’s strategic advantage and empowering them to be able to deliver the outcomes we need in multiple theatres at once.

    The growing success of that work was powerfully shown last week when, in less than 24 hours, the UK was able to both take action to defend ourselves against the Houthis and uplift our support to Ukraine to new record levels.

    If Putin thought we’d be distracted by the events in the Middle East then last week, because of the long-term decisions this government has taken, his hopes were surely dashed.

    In a complex world, no nation can afford to go it alone, so we must continue strengthening our alliances so the world knows they cannot be broken.

    Defence is in many ways the cornerstone of our relations across the world.

    Our world leading Armed Forces, cutting-edge industrial base and willingness to support our allies is the reason why Britain is the partner of choice for so many.

    And among our partnerships, NATO remains pre-eminent. 75 years after its foundation, today NATO is bigger than ever.

    But the challenges are bigger too.

    That’s why the UK has committed nearly the totality of our air, land and maritime assets to NATO.

    But, in 2024, I am determined to do even more.

    Which is why I can announce today that UK will be sending some 20,000 personnel to lead one of NATO’s largest deployments since the end of the Cold War, Exercise Steadfast Defender.

    It will see our military joining forces with counterparts from 30 NATO countries plus Sweden, providing vital reassurance against the Putin menace.

    Our carrier strike group will be out in full force, with our magnificent flagship HMS Queen Elizabeth leading the way.

    And flying from her decks will be the fifth generation F35 lightning jets, accompanied by a fearsome phalanx of frigates, destroyers and helicopters.

    We’ll also have a submarine patrolling the depths and one of our Poseidon P8 aircraft conducting surveillance from the skies above, and more than 400 of our brilliant Royal Marines will be training in the Artic Circle, contending with some of the toughest environments anywhere on the planet.

    On land, we’ll be deploying over 16,000 soldiers, led by our 7th Light Mechanised Brigade Combat Team which superbly led our recent response in Kosovo.

    All of which, makes this our largest deployment of land forces to NATO for 40 years.

    But NATO is only part of our rich tapestry of partnerships.

    And this government has taken bold decisions to embark on the partnerships we need to defend ourselves from a more dangerous world.

    We are rapidly building our AUKUS partnership.

    And last month I signed our Global Combat Air Partnership (or GCAP) with Japan and Italy.

    These projects are not just about building nuclear powered subs, sixth generation fighter planes, and innovating in all forms of Defence.

    They are about sharpening our strategic edge so we can maintain our advantage over our adversaries.

    They are precisely the deep relationships needed to preserve national and regional security.

    And they’re emblematic of the way we will work in the future.

    But it’s not enough to deter. We must lead. Standing up for our values around the world.

    And Ukraine is a test case.

    This year, its future may well be decided.

    Valiant Ukrainian warriors have had incredible success pushing back invading Russian forces, retaking 50 per cent of the territory stolen by Russia, opening up a maritime passage in the Black Sea.

    But the West must not let them down.

    British leadership has already had a galvanising effect.

    We’ve convened some 10 countries to help Ukrainians train here in the UK.

    And today I can announce that our programmes have now trained over 60,000 Ukrainian troops since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in 2014.

    Last month, I launched a new maritime coalition with Norway to defend Ukraine’s maritime flank.

    Since then, over 20 partner nations have joined that coalition.

    But the international community cannot let this support slip.

    Putin believes the West lacks staying power.

    And since the future of the world order is at stake, we must prove him wrong.

    Rewarding his war with victory would only increase the risk of escalation.

    Not only because he’s hell bent on rebuilding the Russian empire.

    But because it would signal weakness to other would-be aggressors.

    That is why on Friday the Prime Minister signed the historic UK-Ukraine Agreement on Security Cooperation.

    The start of a 100-year alliance that we are building with our Ukrainian friends.

    It sees us increasing our military support to £2.5bn – taking the total of UK military aid to more than £7bn. With even more gifted directly from the UK’s equipment inventory.

    £200m will be pressed into producing and procuring thousands of drones, including surveillance and long-range strike drones.

    This continues the UK’s proud record as a leading donor – always being the first to get Ukraine exactly what they need.

    The UK was the first to provide Ukraine with weapons training, the first to provide NLAW anti-tank missiles, the first to give modern tanks, the first to send long range missiles.

    Now we will become the largest provider of drones too.

    These will be manufactured here in the UK in tandem with international partners, helping to enhance our unmanned vehicle capabilities at home too.

    But our new agreement with Ukraine is about so much more than money.

    It formalises our support in everything from intelligence sharing and cyber security to medical and military training.

    And it sees us taking the first giant step towards a century long partnership.

    Britain understands that the battle in Ukraine is existential, it proves there is no such thing as an isolated conflict.

    And that to shore up the international order, we must be able to act globally.

    So, just as we were there to help evacuate British citizens from Sudan last year, just as we are working with partners to ensure the territorial integrity of our Commonwealth ally Guyana, we have also been a critical part of the US-led international operation to protect freedom of navigation in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden.

    Some 15 per cent of the world’s shipping passes through these narrow shipping lanes.

    But the Houthis have persistently violated the law by menacing commercial vessels in the region.

    In the Red Sea we have seen how our brilliant Royal Navy had to act to defend itself against the intolerable and growing number of Houthi attacks.

    And earlier this month the world sent a very clear message to the Iranian-backed Houthis.

    End your illegal and unjustified actions. Stop risking innocent lives. Cease threatening the global economy.

    We could not have been clearer with our warnings, which they chose to ignore.

    And enough was enough.

    So last Thursday, the Prime Minister and I authorised RAF precision strikes using four RAF Typhoon FGR4s and supported by two Voyager air refuelling tankers.

    The result is the Houthis have been dealt a blow.

    Our decisive response in the Red Sea and our uplift in support for Ukraine offer a direct blueprint for how the UK must continue to lead in the future.

    Offering our unwavering support to our allies, and in times of struggle galvanising global responses to any malign actor seeking to break the rules based international order, and acting decisively when the moment calls for us to defend ourselves.

    So, deter and lead, which brings me to the final essential element of being prepared. Defending our nation.

    If we are to defend our homeland, we must ensure our entire defence eco-system is ready.

    Firstly, we must make our industry more resilient to empower us to re-arm, re-supply and innovate far faster than our opponents.

    There’s a huge opportunity here for British industry.

    The UK has long been a by-word for pioneering technologies.

    We gave the world radar, the jet-engine and the world wide web.

    We’ve not lost that spark of creativity.

    On the contrary, today the UK is one of only three $1 trillion tech economies.

    But just imagine what we could do if we managed to better harness that latent inspiration, ingenuity and invention for the Defence of our nation?

    Just think about the game-changing tech we could supply to our brave men and women.

    From the pilots ready to scramble at a moment’s notice to the soldiers protecting NATO’s flanks from Putin’s fury.

    To the sailors deployed across the seven seas to secure our prosperity.

    To our absolutely essential Royal Marine Commandos, without whom we could not properly defend our nation.

    To those you will never see and never know but who are out there, giving their all, on your behalf.

    They are the cornerstone of our defence and we owe them an unimaginable debt of gratitude.

    Which is why my commitment to getting them what they deserve is iron cast.

    After all, our greatest resource has always been the men and women who work tirelessly to protect our great nation.

    But to defend our nation from the increasing dangers of tomorrow, they must have what they need to do the job.

    That’s why this Conservative government has always and has already taken vital steps to increase defence spending, approving the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War – injecting a further £5 billion last year to replenish our stocks and modernise our nuclear enterprise.

    Delivering the largest cash terms defence budget ever. Spending over £50 billion on the defence of our nation.

    And just last week, not only maintaining our support to Ukraine but increasing it to its highest level ever.

    To some the costs may seem steep – but Britain cannot afford to reverse the spending gains we have made.

    And under this Conservative government we never will.

    And we will use our influence to ensure other allies and friends, faced with this new reality, and match our commitment.

    So, we find ourselves at the dawn of a new era. The Berlin Wall a distant memory.

    And we have come full circle.

    Moving from a post-war to a pre-war world.

    An age of idealism has been replaced by a period of hard-headed realism.

    Today our adversaries are busily rebuilding their barriers.

    Old enemies are reanimated. New foes are taking shape. Battle lines are being redrawn.

    The tanks are literally on Europe’s Ukrainian lawn.

    And the foundations of the world order are being shaken to their core.

    We stand at this crossroads – whether to surrender to a sea of troubles, or do everything we can to deter the danger.

    I believe that, in reality, it’s no choice at all.

    To guarantee our freedoms, we must be prepared.

    Prepared to deter – the enemies who are gathering all around us. Lead our allies in whatever conflicts are to come.

    Defend our nation whatever threat should arise. This is what Britain has always done.

    And it is what we must do again if we, like Margaret Thatcher speaking here 35 years ago, are once more to dream of a future without walls.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2024 Statement on Strikes Against Houthi Military Targets

    Rishi Sunak – 2024 Statement on Strikes Against Houthi Military Targets

    The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, on 12 January 2024.

    The Royal Air Force has carried out targeted strikes against military facilities used by Houthi rebels in Yemen.

    In recent months, the Houthi militia have carried out a series of dangerous and destabilising attacks against commercial shipping in the Red Sea, threatening UK and other international ships, causing major disruption to a vital trade route and driving up commodity prices. Their reckless actions are risking lives at sea and exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in Yemen.

    Despite the repeated warnings from the international community, the Houthis have continued to carry out attacks in the Red Sea, including against UK and US warships just this week.

    This cannot stand. The United Kingdom will always stand up for freedom of navigation and the free flow of trade. We have therefore taken limited, necessary and proportionate action in self-defence, alongside the United States with non-operational support from the Netherlands, Canada and Bahrain against targets tied to these attacks, to degrade Houthi military capabilities and protect global shipping.

    The Royal Navy continues to patrol the Red Sea as part of the multinational Operation Prosperity Guardian to deter further Houthi aggression, and we urge them to cease their attacks and take steps to de-escalate.

  • Grant Shapps – 2023 Speech at Conservative Party Conference

    Grant Shapps – 2023 Speech at Conservative Party Conference

    The speech made by Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Defence, in Manchester on 1 October 2023.

    When people think of the Blitz they tend to think of London – the burning Docklands and St Paul’s shrouded in smoke.

    But Manchester endured its own Blitz early on, in 1940, where some 680 people were killed.

    Fortunately for our country, that kind of systematic destruction on this scale is a thing of memory.

    But imagine if a trip to the market or restaurant could be your last; that you or those that you love might fall victim to a sudden attack by a cruise missile or suicide drone plunging from the sky.

    This is daily life in Ukraine; on freedom’s front line.

    Even as the fighting falls deep into its second year, it’s still hard to believe that a full-scale war is raging here, in Europe.

    And Ukraine is not some long away distant country of which we know nothing.

    It is part of the family of European democratic nations, and they are fighting for their very survival.

    Fighting for freedom against an invader as ruthless as any in modern times.

    A tyrant who sees civilians as collateral damage in a failed war of conquest he cannot win, but he also cannot find a way to exit either.

    Putin hoped to take Ukraine by bluff.

    A swift armoured invasion designed to seize Kyiv and install a puppet government.

    Ukraine would be quickly, it would be overwhelmed, it would be reduced to a vassal state, its identity and freedom crushed.

    But the Ukrainian people were not going to let that happen. And neither were we.

    The United Kingdom stepped up.

    We have provided billions in military aid – second only to the contribution of the United States.

    We have consistently been first in responding to Ukraine’s needs.

    The N-LAW anti-tank missiles wisely sent in advance by Britain – thank you to Ben Wallace – were crucial in those first early weeks when the fate of Ukraine hung in the balance.

    And as N-LAWs struck fear into the hearts of invading Russian tank crews at the beginning, so our long-range cruise missiles do the same for Russian commanders today.

    With weapons like Storm Shadow, everywhere in Russian-occupied Ukraine, is on the front line.

    But we cannot – we must not – let up now.

    The war is consuming weapons, ammunition and, yes, people at an appalling rate.

    If Ukrainians are to prevail against the evil assault on their homeland, we must remain steadfast.

    That’s why we’re helping to train their F16 pilots.

    It’s why by the end of this year we’ll have trained more than 50,000 Ukrainian recruits, starting well in advance of the war.

    And of course, it’s why Ukrainians have been welcomed by so many British families under the Homes for Ukraine scheme.

    Including – for a year – in my own home.

    Now, my wife and I were partly moved to act because our own ancestors fled to this country to escape the pogroms of Eastern Europe in an earlier age.

    But what really moved us most, was the palpable sense of generosity from the British public for our new arrivals to Britain.

    Complete strangers came forward with clothes, with schoolbooks for six-year-old Nikita, and most precious of all, their time to help ensure the three-generation Ukrainian family that came to live with us felt truly at home in the United Kingdom.

    You know, we should never be complacent about this country, whatever our grumbles. This is a precious and incredibly generous land.

    On my first visit to Ukraine this summer, I visited Nikita’s nursery in Kyiv.

    I saw the apartment block across the road from his Kindergarten that had been destroyed by one of Putin’s rockets at the start of the war.

    This was the attack that made Nikita, his mother, his grandmother, together with their dog – Max – flee from Ukraine.

    Only, as I glanced across the street from his nursery this summer, there was no bombed out shell to view. The apartment block has already been completely rebuilt. Re-inhabited.

    What I was witnessing was the iron resolve of the Ukrainian people. Ordinary people, maintaining a semblance of life even amongst air raids sirens.

    Rebuilding their homes, the moment they get the chance.

    And last week, as Defence Secretary, I visited Kyiv again.

    And this time, I met with the steely resolve of President Zelenskyy himself.

    At a time when he could have left the capital. At a time when he could have become a leader in exile. He did not, he stayed put. Providing inspiration for his people and he showed remarkable bravery.

    Ukraine has taught us a lesson.

    The war reminds us of the unprovoked aggression by one nation against another is still a reality in global affairs.

    Left unchecked – we are all in danger.

    And this is why we must invest in our defence.

    That’s why, under the Conservative government, defence spending has exceeded £50 billion a year for the first time ever.

    And conference, it is why we will maintain our leading position in NATO by increasing the defence budget to 2.5 per cent of GDP when conditions allow.

    Because we know the world is changing. So as a result, we’re working ever closer with our allies.

    Developing the latest naval technology to protect our Commonwealth kith and kin in the Pacific as they face up the challenge of the rapidly expanding Chinese navy.

    Deploying two of the world’s largest and most advanced carriers in history the Royal Navy has ever seen, in the Queen Elizabeth, HMS, and HMS Prince of Wales.

    We are ploughing billions into our own naval shipbuilding program, as well as civilian construction to create jobs and grow our economy.

    And Britain is one of the few nations capable of operating in every ocean of the world, simultaneously.

    Our ultimate national insurance policy is, of course, our at sea nuclear deterrent.

    So, we’re building the new Dreadnought-class submarines that will carry Britain’s nuclear deterrent into the middle of the century.

    And today I can announce that we have signed contracts worth £4 billion with leading British businesses to drive forward the development of the most powerful attack submarines ever operated by the Royal Navy.

    These hunter-killer AUKUS submarines will empower the Royal Navy to maintain our strategic advantage under the sea – enabling us to compete with emerging navies anywhere in the world as our world becomes more unpredictable and dangerous.

    Today’s announcement will support thousands of jobs, from Barrow-In-Furness where these submarines will be built, to Derby where our reactor-build facilities will be expanded.

    And by backing British businesses to develop them, we are taking the long-term decisions we need to boost our defence industry and to grow our economy.

    Under our Prime Minister’s leadership, the Conservatives are putting the UK at the heart of NATO.

    Vladimir Putin shattered peace across Europe, but in doing so he made our collective will and our resolve more important than ever.

    And in response, the UK is taking a leading role in ensuring NATO remains the bedrock of our security for us and our allies.

    We are one of NATO’s very few members exceeding the critical 2% of GDP target for the amount of money which is spent on our defence. And, of course, we are the largest defence spender in Europe and we are delivering the capabilities our alliance needs.

    Today, I can announce that the UK has stepped up again, with two new deployments.

    First, in response to a request from our Polish friends, RAF Typhoons are landing in Poland as I speak, to support our NATO ally with the growing threat of Russian interference.

    Deploying ahead of Poland’s elections, they will be a powerful way of undeniably showing Putin that this Conservative government will protect democracy and freedom from any despotic tyrant that threatens our allies.

    Second, at the end of what I think has been a concerning week, there’s been a request from NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, and so I have authorised the full deployment of a battalion-sized UK Strategic Reserve Force to NATO’s Kosovo peacekeeping mission.

    In the days ahead, hundreds of soldiers from the 1st Battalion, Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment will join the 400 British service men and women already in Kosovo.

    And, as the best of the best, I know our soldiers will do the United Kingdom proud.

    We have been unwavering in our support for NATO – contributing to every allied mission that they have and supporting them this weekend, so that when NATO contact us, they knew the answer from the United Kingdom would be yes.

    As Conservatives, we put our nation’s security first.

    Which is more than can be said for Labour.

    So, what is Keir Starmer’s approach to our fundamental security?

    Simple. He personally campaigned to make one Jeremy Corbyn, Prime Minister. The man who called for NATO to be disbanded.

    Starmer actually backed plans for Britain to adopt a ‘non-nuclear, non-aligned defence policy’.

    In plain English, that meant scrapping Trident, abandoning NATO and leaving us naked in the face of nuclear threats from the Kremlin.

    And that isn’t just the Starmer of the past.

    Since then, he has gone further – appointing a Shadow Foreign Secretary who has repeatedly voted against renewing our nuclear deterrent.

    You know, in the military sphere, it’s sometimes good to keep your enemy guessing.

    The problem with Kier Starmer is that on policy, he keeps everyone guessing.

    Including himself.

    What would Britain’s armed forces look like after five years of Labour?

    Who knows?

    The man will say anything – anything – to get himself elected.

    But one thing we do know is that you just cannot trust Labour on Defence.

    And if – perish the thought – Labour get back into power, the old habits will resurface. Defence – always dismissed and disparaged by the Left – will be the first casualty.

    Our service people and defence industries, and our veterans all deserve much better.

    Conference, we must not let that happen.

    But there is one area in which we absolutely must do better.

    Service life is tough enough on families – service men and women – without having to put up with sub-standard accommodation.

    There are too many old and creaking buildings in our estate, and that lowers morale.

    Our accommodation estate is in fact very large. Indeed, if the Ministry of Defence was a Housing Association, it would rank amongst the biggest in the land.

    So, I am making it a personal priority to improve its quality.

    Which is why we’re injecting £400 million to ensure that we provide the modern accommodation that our service families deserve.

    And while resolving this problem will not be instantaneous, I am determined that we fix it in order to support our brave men and women at home, as well as on the front line.

    And while we’re on the subject of morale, I want to end by saying something about our Party.

    One of the things I most admire about the military is that they don’t gloss over the harsh realities.

    Now, times are tough. We are behind in the polls. The pundits tell us that Labour is a shoo-in. And we wouldn’t be human if we didn’t sometimes feel the pressure.

    But for those who think that this conference is going to be nothing more than inward looking or downcast, I say this: This country faces an important choice; Rishi Sunak, who will make the hard but necessary long-term decisions to get the country on the right path for the future…

    … or Sir Keir Starmer – a man focused on the short-term and lacking the backbone to make the big changes that Britain needs.

    In Rishi Sunak, we have a leader who has weathered a brutal baptism of fire and is coming through. His mettle has been tested and not found wanting.

    He has stuck to his course, trusting in what he believes to be right for the country. It doesn’t always make him popular in the short term – but that is the price of doing the right thing.

    We need leadership that puts the national interest over self-interest, and does what is right, not what is easy.

    Now, I trust the British people, their good sense. They can spot a serious man to take the tough decisions.

    And they can spot an opposition leader who has made an art out of political opportunism.

    So, let’s take the fight to Say-Anything-Starmer.

    He’s measuring the curtains. He thinks he’s home and dry. He thinks that he can take Downing Street by bluff.

    But as the steely Sir Claude Auchinleck said before the first battle of El Alamein – when the British had their backs to the wall and Rommel seemed to be triumphant:

    ‟Let’s show him where he gets off.”

    Thank you.

  • Grant Shapps – 2023 Statement on Becoming Defence Secretary

    Grant Shapps – 2023 Statement on Becoming Defence Secretary

    The statement made by Grant Shapps on his appointment as Defence Secretary on 31 August 2023.

    I’m honoured to be appointed as Defence Secretary by Rishi Sunak. I’d like to pay tribute to the enormous contribution Ben Wallace has made to UK defence & global security over the last 4 years.

    As I get to work at DefenceHQ I am looking forward to working with the brave men and women of our Armed Forces who defend our nation’s security. And continuing the UK’s support for Ukraine in their fight against Putin’s barbaric invasion.