There is nothing strategic about Starmer's defence review
This Strategic Defence Review has been a long time coming. Back when he was still shadow defence secretary, John Healey had promised a 'strategic defence and security review' as far back as May 2022. The process was then launched eleven days after the Labour government took office last July. There had been reviews in 2010, 2015, 2021 and 2023, but this one was different, as it would be conducted not by serving Whitehall mandarins but by external reviewers.
The team was led by former Labour defence secretary and Nato secretary general Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, who had overseen the 1998 Strategic Defence Review. The other reviewers were General Sir Richard Barrons, former commander of Joint Forces Command; and County Durham-born Dr Fiona Hill, a Russia expert who had worked as an intelligence analyst in the United States, latterly as a senior director on the National Security Council.
So how does this 'root and branch review of UK defence' intend to 'make Britain secure at home and strong abroad for decades to come'? Does it fulfil the Prime Minister's promise to rebuild the armed forces and provide 'the capabilities needed to ensure the UK's resilience for the long term'?
Eye-catching spending has been placed front and centre of the review.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
21 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Opinion: Our valued farmers are being badly let down
Farming is more than just a job, it's a way of life, writes David Chadwick MP. Our farmers care for the land, keep food on our tables and support the wider rural economy. Yet right now, they are facing an onslaught of pressure, and both the Welsh and UK Labour Governments are failing to stand by them. Across my constituency, I hear the same thing from farmers - that it has never been harder to do what they do. And instead of backing them, governments are making things worse through careless policy, unfair taxation, and more foreign imports. One of the most damaging examples is the family farms tax. This proposal is causing real fear among farming communities, making it harder to pass on farms to the next generation. That is why in Westminster, I have backed cross-party calls to pause this damaging policy immediately. Our farmers should not be punished for handing down the family farm. Fairness in the supply chain should be a key concern too. Farmers are also being squeezed by powerful supermarkets and retailers who dictate prices, with producers feeling like they have no real choice in negotiations and are forced to accept deals that leave them struggling to break even. That is why I secured a debate in Parliament on the Groceries Code Adjudicator. A decade after its creation, the supermarket regulator is still falling short. I am pushing for it to be strengthened and made truly independent, so that farmers finally have a regulator in their corner. Another crisis is unfolding with the loss of small abattoirs. Between 2018 and 2022, the number of red meat facilities fell by a quarter, and small poultry abattoirs dropped by 40 percent. These services are essential to animal welfare, food traceability, and our rural economies. In Parliament, I criticised the closure of the Small Abattoir Fund and condemned the 20 percent increase in meat inspection fees, which is threatening small operators with closure. I also have called for investment in mobile units, proportionate regulation, and clear food labelling to support local meat producers, these decisions are no-brainers for our rural communities.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
New Red Book reveals how distant Labour have become
Its cover is a photograph of the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders (UCS) 'work-in' of 1971-1972, led by Jimmy Reid. Five thousand copies of the book were printed by its publisher, Edinburgh University Students' Publications Board. Contributions were wide and varied from the likes of Jim Sillars, Robin Cook and Tom Nairn and 25 others – including no women. To say that Brown edited The Red Paper is a misnomer because he pretty much accepted all the contributions in their states of first draft. But when all is said and done, The Red Paper was the public political highpoint of post-war 'Scottish socialism', defined as social democracy through a form of labourism, meaning unions would deliver what they called 'socialism' through the parliamentary road – and not revolutionary road – and via the Labour Party. It was a time when, to mix metaphors, Brown was Red. READ MORE: 'Joy, celebration and warmth' of Palestinian art to be showcased at Edinburgh Fringe Such was the emphasis on socialism as social democracy in Scotland, it almost seemed to offer a version of 'socialism in one country'. And, though seldom read because of the tiny type, it was a book that 'lit up the murky Scottish political scene like a lightning-flash' according to Neal Ascherson in The Observer in 2000. This indicates the book had a profound psychological and political but not intellectual or practical impact. Brown introduced the chapters by saying: 'Scottish socialists cannot support a strategy for independence which postpones the meeting of urgent social and economic needs until the day after independence. But neither can they give unconditional support to maintaining the integrity of the United Kingdom – and all that that entails – without any guarantee of radical social change.' So, the argument was constitutional change via devolution could lead to social justice. For Labour in 1975, this was heretical because the Unionist Labour left was mesmerised by the party's pledge in its 1974 General Election manifestos to 'bring about a fundamental and irreversible shift in the balance of power and wealth in favour of working people and their families'. And Brown's perspective was not the 'devolution will kill nationalism stone dead' argument of right-wing Labour MP and Scottish Secretary George Robertson, 20 years later in 1995. At the time, Brown was more reflective and reasoned. With the SNP Westminster breakthrough in the October 1974 General Election with 11 seats, he did not regard nationalism as a cancer that needed to be cut out as many of his fellow Labour members did. He wrote: 'What this Red Paper seeks to do is to transcend that false and sterile antithesis which has been manufactured between the nationalism of the SNP and the anti-nationalism of the Unionist parties.' But, nonetheless, the attainment of social justice of the Blair-Brown 1997-2010 Labour governments and the Labour-LibDem coalition Scottish governments of 1999-2007 was not much in evidence. It certainly was not advanced by the Brown-initiated cross-party pledge of 'The Vow' promising further devolution on September 16 ,2014. Indeed, Brown not only junked his beliefs of using the state to ameliorate the outcomes of the market but then advocated using the state to make the market more efficient. Long gone were any ideas of workers' self-management and public ownership, including the oil industry. One of the organisers of a University of Aberdeen conference to assess The Red Paper in 2000 commented: 'It is surprising how many people have forgotten about it, including, perhaps, Gordon Brown himself. Unlike many of the other contributors to the Red Paper, he seems reluctant to recall the time when he advocated public ownership and community democracy.' Not everybody gave up on the ideas of this type of Scottish socialism, though. Within Scottish Labour, the Campaign for Socialism group was established in 1994 to fight against the removal of Clause IV on public ownership by Blair and Brown from Labour's constitution. The group has counted a handful of MPs in Scotland and MSPs among its members. READ MORE: Owen Jones: The UK media has ignored this hugely revealing scandal in Israel More significantly, those around the group worked with others on the left to produce a new version of The Red Paper on Scotland in 2005 for the 30th anniversary. This same formula was used by The Red Paper Collective to produce a further edition the year before the referendum in 2014 called Class, Nation And Socialism: The Red Paper On Scotland 2014. The Red Paper Collective was established in 2012. Now in 2025, we have a fourth iteration produced by it called Keep Left: Red Paper On Scotland 2025. Every Red Paper after the first has been more readable than the last. But the tide has gone out for its ideas: not in terms of their credibility or coherence but in terms of their traction inside Scottish Labour. This is the story of Thatcherism creating the creature that is 'New' Labour, in which Brown was a leading light. When asked in 2002 what her greatest achievement was, Thatcher replied: 'Tony Blair and New Labour. We forced our opponents to change their minds.' North and south of the Border, we are still living with that legacy. Professor Gregor Gall is a research associate at the University of Glasgow and editor of A New Scotland: Building An Equal, Fair And Sustainable Society (Pluto Press, 2022)
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
How Labour beat the odds — and rocked the SNP
To be fair to the press pack, it was not just the commentators, pundits and bookies who rubbished the party's prospects in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. Some of the criticism came from inside the tent. Last week, one Labour insider told The Times the party should expect to get 'quite considerably humped'. Another told the Record: 'It was supposed to be a two-horse race between Labour and the SNP, but we selected a donkey and look like coming third.' Jackie Baillie, Anas Sarwar and Davy Russell (Image: Colin Mearns/The Herald) The thing about donkeys though, is they are known for being sure-footed, steady and persistent — especially when the going gets tough. Mr Russell, a well-known local figure who had been dismissed by some as the 'invisible man' after swerving media appearances and hustings, proved quietly effective. READ MORE The by-election was triggered by the death of SNP MSP Christina McKelvie in March. She was just 57 and had been on leave following a stage two breast cancer diagnosis. In 2021, Ms McKelvie won the seat with 46% of the vote and a majority of 4,582. Labour's victory was narrow — they took 31% of the vote, winning by just 602 votes. The SNP's Katy Loudon took 29.4%, while Reform UK came a close third, with 26.2%. It was, in the end, unquestionably a three-horse race. 'At the start, we were not picking up a lot of support for Reform,' one Labour MSP said. 'And that did change. Reform supporters became more vocal and visible at the start of the by-election. I think, truthfully, what everyone was hearing is that the voters were happy with none of us. That is really how it started.' But that presented the party with an opportunity. 'We were able to really promote Davy as a local champion — somebody who will stand aside from what is going on nationally and just be at a grassroots level, take up the issues of the people here and really fight for them. 'We saw a glimpse of that when Davy was at a visit and journalists were there and he was asked about Winter Fuel Payments. He said this should be reinstated across the board. He did not look for lines to take — he just said what he believed. And I think people like that.' The party source also said not to underestimate the power or popularity of lawn bowls in South Lanarkshire. Mr Russell is a keen bowler, playing to a high standard. He was due to take part in a big international tournament on Saturday. Behind the win was what Labour insisted was a textbook ground operation. 'We worked unbelievably hard to get our voters out,' Labour's Michael Marra told The Herald on Sunday at Friday's victory rally. 'The numbers in the result were the numbers we were seeing in our campaign. So in that respect, I was not surprised. 'But given everything that has been said against us in recent months, it is a big change — a shift in momentum towards the Labour Party — and it means there is now the real prospect of a Scottish Labour government next year.' By polling day, Labour's campaign had identified 7,000 likely supporters — and then mobilised an army of activists to get them to the ballot box. Labour spin doctor Ollie Milne, Anas Sarwar, Party general secretary Kate Watson, and MP Joani Reid (Image: PA) 'We would have known about a lot of postal voters who had already told us they had voted Labour, so we would not have gone back to their doors in the final days or on polling day. Polling day was really focusing on people who were Labour promises,' one campaign insider said. That highly targeted get-out-the-vote strategy paid off. 'We had big teams of Labour students, people from the local party, neighbouring constituencies as well — lots of Lanarkshire members and councillors out — but also people from all over the country, including Scottish Parliament candidates, who understood that a Labour defeat in this by-election would have been bad for their campaigns. A Labour victory would really turbo-boost their own.' READ MORE There is still some anger in the party about the SNP's treatment of Mr Russell. 'It was really unfair,' one source said. 'Some of our opponents said Davy was in hiding, but he was on the doorstep.' There are some in the SNP who believed the party's attacks on Mr Russell went too far — made their campaign seem 'middle class' and detached — and ultimately backfired. 'We played the man, not the ball,' said one MSP, asked why they thought the party had fallen short. Others, however, are not letting his victory get in the way of their aspersions. Former SNP MP John Nicolson took to social media to suggest Mr Russell — a former senior council official in Glasgow, responsible for a team of 2,000 workers — would not be clever enough for Holyrood. The ex-broadcaster said Mr Russell would find committee work 'a struggle'. 'But brighter members will cover for him, at least initially,' he added. Party activists watch the counters at Thursday's by-election count (Image: PA) Polling expert Mark Diffley said the result should not have surprised those looking at the numbers in recent polls. 'The SNP has lost on average 15 percentage points in the polls between 2021 and now, and Labour has only lost two,' he said. 'Cards on the table, I thought the SNP would win narrowly, because actually their vote share in Hamilton went down by more than what the average opinion polling is telling us — by about three points. 'And had they gone down by what I thought — 13 or 14 points — they would have won the seat. 'I also think, you know, some politicians said this was a two-horse race. That was really never going to be the case. I think a lot of people did get sucked in. It was always going to be close.' In his final appeal to voters, Mr Swinney said voting for the SNP was a chance to 'defeat the gutter politics of Nigel Farage'. Speaking to journalists, he said Labour were 'out of it' and it was a straight fight between his party and Reform. 'I think the First Minister framed it like that because he wanted to appeal to Labour voters,' Mr Diffley added. 'It was the Labour voters that decided this election. They got 32% in 2021. Where were they going to go? And it turns out a lot of them stayed with Labour.' Reform's Thomas Kerr said the First Minister's comments undoubtedly helped his candidate, Ross Lambie. 'It highlighted us — got us more publicity than what we were getting. The more John Swinney and Anas Sarwar were talking about Reform, the better we were going to do, because people saw it as a sort of cynical political establishment stitch-up against us.' Reform candidate Ross Lambie, deputy leader Richard Tice and Cllr Thomas Kerr (Image: PA) 'I think everyone who was listening to John Swinney's spin on this will now take what he says with a massive pinch of salt,' Mr Marra said. 'The campaign the SNP ran, trying to embolden and push Reform forward at every opportunity, was not just disingenuous in terms of the result — it was also dangerous, let us be clear about that. 'It was a strategy to get them to 2026, to not talk about their record — about the state of our hospitals, about NHS waiting lists, about the state of our schools. I do not think that is now an approach that can hold.' However, Mr Kerr was willing to give the First Minister the benefit of the doubt. 'I am willing to take John Swinney at his word,' the Glasgow councillor added. 'I do think he genuinely thought that was the case. I do not think he was playing games. I genuinely think he was a bit shaken about the support Reform was getting.' At his press conference on Friday, Mr Swinney insisted there had been progress for his party, when the result was measured against their dire performance at last year's general election. 'Last summer, I think people would have doubted the SNP could have been in contention to win a by-election in Hamilton after the severe loss we suffered. But we were in contention. We were not strong enough to win, but we were in contention — and we will build on that.' 'There has been progress — but that, in of itself, is not enough,' one SNP MSP told The Herald on Sunday. 'The party needs to stop talking to itself and take a step back and reflect on ordinary people's perspective. It should have been doing that years ago. Here we are a good way through some really tough times — where people are hanging on by their fingernails — and we have been tinkering. 'It simply cannot be enough to rely on Labour to fail.' They said it was time for Mr Swinney to make changes in his top team. 'I think a proper ministerial reshuffle is required, and an exercise undertaken to seek new policies. For example, I would call in the former MPs who have experience but have had time to refresh their perspective. 'I can sense that many — for the first time — are now nervous, and rightfully so. 'On independence — again, it can never be enough to simply run a competent devolved government without a vision of what could be.' On Friday, Mr Swinney said he would 'consider all issues around the ministerial team'. Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Màiri McAllan, he added, would return from maternity leave soon. READ MORE Another senior SNP insider said they were not surprised by the defeat. 'I knew that we were going to lose it. What was the reason to vote SNP? We are not inspiring anybody on independence, because we are not talking about it — and it is nowhere to be seen in the party's message. 'Then we are pitching ourselves against Reform in a way that I think is totally unhelpful — and it backfired massively. It is almost like trying to replace the old SNP v Tory or SNP v Labour strategy. 'You cannot do that with a party that has never been in government — that does not carry that baggage — that does not have that resentment. 'People are voting Reform from all directions, including many former SNP voters. What is the reason for SNP? Well, it is independence.' (Image: PA) 'I think it is really disappointing the way the leadership has chosen just not to talk about what the SNP stands for,' they added. 'It is a very odd thing. I joined in 2007 when Nicola and Alex were the joint ticket and was very much attracted to that partnership because it spoke to different parts of Scotland. 'Right now we have got John and Kate, who are, I think, speaking to one part of Scotland. I am not sure they are talking to everybody.' While they thought Mr Swinney's leadership was safe, they predicted the internal elections for key posts — national secretary, party president, maybe even depute leader — could get 'spicy'. 'I think we will see some movements in those spaces.'
