The political turmoil surrounding the United Kingdom’s defence policy has intensified after Armed Forces Minister Al Carns resigned from the government, becoming the second senior defence figure in days to step down over disagreements with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s military spending plans.
Carns announced his resignation on Thursday evening, stating that the government’s proposed Defence Investment Plan (DIP) was “neither transformative enough nor sufficiently funded” to meet the security challenges facing Britain.
His departure follows the resignation of former Defence Secretary John Healey, who sharply criticized the government’s defence spending proposals, arguing they fall significantly short of what is required to protect the country amid growing global threats.
In his resignation letter, Carns said he could not continue defending a level of military investment that he believed was inadequate, despite previously suggesting he would wait until the Defence Investment Plan was finalized before making a decision on his future.
The resignations have dealt a significant blow to Prime Minister Starmer’s leadership at a time when his authority is already under increasing pressure. Healey had been regarded as one of Starmer’s closest and most loyal cabinet allies, making his departure particularly damaging.
Adding to the growing unrest, Labour MP Pamela Nash also resigned from her role as parliamentary assistant at the Ministry of Defence, citing concerns about delays and difficulties in securing the funding required to implement the government’s defence strategy.
To fill the vacancy, Starmer appointed Security Minister Dan Jarvis, a former British Army officer, as the new Defence Secretary. Jarvis now faces the difficult task of overseeing the completion of the Defence Investment Plan while addressing concerns raised by his predecessors.
The dispute centers on how Britain will finance its long-term defence ambitions. The government’s Strategic Defence Review, published last year, outlined plans to strengthen military readiness through investments in ammunition stockpiles, advanced fighter aircraft, drone technologies, and new attack submarines.
However, disagreements have emerged over the scale and timing of funding required to implement those objectives.
Reports indicate that the government is considering an additional £13.5 billion for the Ministry of Defence over the next four years, significantly below the £28 billion increase reportedly sought by defence officials.
Healey warned that the proposed funding package is heavily backloaded, meaning much of the money would arrive later in the decade despite urgent operational requirements in the immediate future. He argued that Britain needs increased readiness now rather than delayed investments.
Prime Minister Starmer has defended the government’s position, insisting that the Defence Investment Plan will provide the military with the resources it needs while maintaining fiscal responsibility.
In a response to Healey’s resignation, Starmer stated that the government’s defence spending increases would be sustainable and funded through difficult budgetary choices rather than excessive borrowing.
The government has already committed to increasing defence spending to 3.5% of Gross Domestic Product by 2035, but details of how that commitment will be financed remain unclear.
Reports suggest the prime minister is considering reductions in capital spending across government departments, with potential cuts of around 1% to departmental budgets helping generate billions of pounds for defence priorities.
The resignations come at a politically sensitive moment for Starmer, with growing pressure from within the Labour Party following disappointing election results and speculation about future leadership challenges.
As NATO allies prepare for a major summit in Turkey next month, Britain’s internal dispute over military funding has raised fresh questions about the country’s defence priorities, strategic readiness, and the political future of the Starmer government.
