UK faces calls for 5% GDP defence spend, ahead of PM's meeting with Nato chief
Mark Rutte, the secretary general of the alliance, said on Thursday he is proposing Nato members spend 5% of gross domestic product (GDP) on defence.
Mr Rutte, who will visit the UK next week to meet the Prime Minister, said members will be expected to spend 3.5% on the military, with a further 1.5% on defence-related measures.
The commitment dwarfs Sir Keir's current defence plans, through which the UK would spend 2.5% of GDP by 2027, with an 'ambition' to raise this to 3% in the next parliament, a period which could stretch to 2034.
Mr Rutte is said to be pushing for the target to be met by 2032, but speaking to reporters in Brussels, he suggested there was a need to 'consult' member countries on the details of a deadline.
At a press conference, Mr Rutte said: 'I will propose an overall investment plan that will total 5% of GDP in defence investment and 3.5% of GDP for core defence spending.'
He said this was to meet new 'capability targets' that ministers agreed on at a meeting earlier on Thursday, as well as 1.5% per year in 'defence and security-related investments like infrastructure and industry'.
Asked if he could ensure countries would meet the commitment over time, Mr Rutte said he had a 'cunning plan' to hold political leaders to account, 'that nations will commit to yearly plans showing the increase each year to make sure that you come to the new target of 5%'.
This would prevent a 'hockey stick' on a graph of spending over time, where it suddenly ramps up towards the end, he added.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer speaking earlier this week as he launched the Strategic Defence Review (Andy Buchanan/PA)
The US, which currently spends 3.4% of GDP on defence, is also being asked to meet the commitment, Mr Rutte said.
'The US is committed to increase defence spending to 5%,' he added.
Asked about a timeline for the commitment, Mr Rutte said he did not want to 'go into more details', adding: 'Obviously, allies will have discussions amongst each other.
'We will consult with each other on some of these details. For example, what is the end date that you want to have reached it?'
Amid pressure from Nato to ramp up spending beyond Sir Keir's current plans, US defence secretary Pete Hegseth has said he was sure the UK was 'going to get there'.
'We think everyone is going to get there, we really do. It's important they do. It's important that the UK gets there,' Mr Hegseth told reporters.
We will continue to protect our people and our way of life. To do this, we must increase defence spending to make NATO a stronger, fairer, and more lethal Alliance #DefMin pic.twitter.com/UBEtdjps9e
— NATO (@NATO) June 5, 2025
Elsewhere, Mr Hegseth declined to name countries not yet committed to the 5% pledge, but then proceeded to name those he claimed were committed, including France, Germany, the Baltic and Nordic countries, Poland, Greece and Hungary.
Downing Street said it would not 'get ahead of' the Nato leaders' summit in the Hague later this month.
A Number 10 spokesman said: 'The Prime Minister is clear that Europe must step up on defence and security, and we are proud to be leading the way with our Nato-first focused SDR, the commitment of our nuclear deterrent and nearly all of our armed forces to Nato and our historic uplift to defence spending.
'But I'm not going to get ahead of the summit in a couple of weeks time.'
During his meeting with Mr Rutte on Monday, the Prime Minister is likely to raise the question of how 'we can ensure all allies meet their stated pledges in support of our collective defence', according to Downing Street.
As well as his talks with Sir Keir, the former Dutch prime minister will visit Sheffield Forgemasters with Defence Secretary John Healey, and give a speech at Chatham House.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Immigration warning over 'less than welcoming' statements
The tone of Sir Keir's remarks on May 12 was, as observed by Mr Sheerin and many others, surely something of a surprise. And it was unexpected even with an awareness - having covered this key issue closely over months and years - of Labour's developing and lamentable stance on immigration. The Prime Minister declared: 'Nations depend on rules – fair rules. Sometimes they're written down, often they're not, but either way, they give shape to our values. They guide us towards our rights, of course, but also our responsibilities, the obligations we owe to one another. Now, in a diverse nation like ours, and I celebrate that, these rules become even more important. Without them, we risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together.' The 'island of strangers' was a striking turn of phrase. Sir Keir went on: 'So when you have an immigration system that seems almost designed to permit abuse, that encourages some businesses to bring in lower-paid workers rather than invest in our young people, or simply one that is sold by politicians to the British people on an entirely false premise, then you're not championing growth, you're not championing justice, or however else people defend the status quo. You're actually contributing to the forces that are slowly pulling our country apart.' Maybe with the benefit of hindsight the Prime Minister's remarks, even though they could have been uttered just as easily by the Tory Brexiters, should not have been quite so much of a shock as they were. After all, Labour has embraced the key elements of the Conservatives' hard Brexit: loss of free movement of people between the UK and European Economic Area nations and the ending of the frictionless trade from which the country previously benefited enormously when it was part of the single market. Nevertheless, Sir Keir's tone was surely surprisingly dismal, even given all of this. Not only did we have the reference to 'an island of strangers' but also this declaration: 'This strategy will finally take back control of our borders and close the book on a squalid chapter for our politics, our economy, and our country.' What seemed clear from Sir Keir's utterings was that populism most certainly did not end with the exit of Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak from the prime minister post. Sir Keir's tone contrasted so starkly with Mr Sheerin's reasoned appraisal of the Prime Minister's remarks and Labour's plans on immigration. We had this from Sir Keir: 'We do have to ask why parts of our economy seem almost addicted to importing cheap labour rather than investing in the skills of people who are here and want a good job in their community. Sectors like engineering, where visas have rocketed while apprenticeships have plummeted.' You would imagine Mr Sheerin, as a veteran of the engineering sector, knows a lot more about the specifics than Sir Keir. And it is worth observing the Scottish Engineering chief executive is passionate about people in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK being trained as engineers. He would love to see the skills shortages which are posing such a challenge to member companies of Scottish Engineering and others in the sector solved. Mr Sheerin is not a politician - just someone with deep knowledge of the Scottish engineering sector. So what did the Scottish Engineering chief have to say in his quarterly report published on Friday? Read more He declared that he found the UK Government's 'latest pronouncements on immigration disappointing', highlighting the detrimental impact on companies of 'statements that feel less than welcoming'. Mr Sheerin hammered home his view that raising minimum qualification levels from Higher equivalents to degree level would 'leave out the skilled trades and crafts roles where we are already in shortest supply: welders, fabricators, electricians, pipefitters, CNC (computer numerical control) machinists to name a few'. That is surely a crucial point. And it is worth emphasising Mr Sheerin's observation that people skilled in these roles are 'already in shortest supply'. Mr Sheerin also noted: 'The shortening of the graduate visa scheme reducing the right to work from two years to 18 months after graduating will not only hit our education sector but also reduce the attractiveness of the scheme for companies who will have a shorter timeline to decide whether to invest in the process to extend the visa of the employee.' This is another good point. And the Scottish Engineering chief executive declared: 'Whilst I recognise that this [immigration] is a contentious political issue across the UK for a whole range of reasons, in engineering and manufacturing in Scotland the reality is that immigration is a vital source of skills and experience that cannot be replaced overnight. These skills levels take years to build - and we should be building them - but closing off the supply before putting in place the actions to do that is another example of an action that will challenge the stated ambition of growing our economy.' The time horizon with regard to building skills levels is important. It might not chime with that of politicians such as Sir Keir, who seems at pains to bang the drum on immigration as Nigel Farage's Reform UK makes a big noise on this front. However, it is a simple factual point that engineering skills do take years to build. Mr Sheerin declared that a frustration for him in Labour's immigration pronouncements was that 'whereas there is considerable detail on how we plan to restrict and close this supply of skills, on the laudable stated aim that we will replace the loss with trained or upskilled UK-born workers, the detail is missing on how that will be achieved'. He added: 'And there is no detail that recognises that engineering skills take between four and six years to get to a starting level of competency. It does not seem an unreasonable request for the get-well plan to carry at least the same level of detail as the take-it-away plan.' This seems like an absolutely fair summation of the problems with Labour's populist immigration proposals. If you were asked to choose whether you think it is Sir Keir or Mr Sheerin who is on the money in relation to immigration policy and its effect on engineering and the broader economy, it would surely be the easiest of questions to answer, any day of the week.
South Wales Guardian
7 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Rayner faces Labour backbench call to ‘smash' existing housebuilding model
Labour's Chris Hinchliff has proposed a suite of changes to the Government's flagship Planning and Infrastructure Bill, part of his party's drive to build 1.5 million homes in England by 2029. Mr Hinchliff has proposed arming town halls with the power to block developers' housebuilding plans, if they have failed to finish their previous projects. He has also suggested housebuilding objectors should be able to appeal against green-lit large developments, if they are not on sites which a council has set aside for building, and put forward a new duty for authorities to protect chalk streams from 'pollution, abstraction, encroachment and other forms of environmental damage'. Mr Hinchliff has told the PA news agency he does not 'want to rebel' but said he would be prepared to trigger a vote over his proposals. He added his ambition was for 'a progressive alternative to our planning system and the developer-led profit-motivated model that we have at the moment'. The North East Hertfordshire MP said: 'Frankly, to deliver the genuinely affordable housing that we need for communities like those I represent, we just have to smash that model. 'So, what I'm setting out is a set of proposals that would focus on delivering the genuinely affordable homes that we need, empowering local communities and councils to have a driving say over what happens in the local area, and also securing genuine protection for the environment going forwards.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the current system results in 'speculative' applications on land which falls outside of councils' local housebuilding strategies, 'putting significant pressure on inadequate local infrastructure'. In his constituency, which lies between London and Cambridge, 'the properties that are being built are not there to meet local need', Mr Hinchliff said, but were instead 'there to be sold for the maximum profit the developer can make'. Asked whether his proposals chimed with the first of Labour's five 'missions' at last year's general election – 'growth' – he replied: 'If we want to have the key workers that our communities need – the nurses, the social care workers, the bus drivers, the posties – they need to have genuinely affordable homes. 'You can't have that thriving economy without the workforce there, but at the moment, the housing that we are delivering is not likely to be affordable for those sorts of roles. 'It's effectively turning the towns into commuter dormitories rather than having thriving local economies, so for me, yes, it is about supporting the local economy.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the 'bottleneck' which slows housebuilding 'is not process, it's profit'. The developer-led housing model is broken. It has failed to deliver affordable homes. Torching environmental safeguards won't fix it—the bottleneck isn't just process, it's profit. We need a progressive alternative: mass council house building in sustainable communities. — Chris Hinchliff MP (@CHinchliffMP) June 6, 2025 Ms Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary, is fronting the Government's plans for 1.5 million new homes by 2029. Among the proposed reforms is a power for ministers to decide which schemes should come before councillors, and which should be delegated to local authority staff, so that committees can 'focus their resources on complex or contentious development where local democratic oversight is required'. Natural England will also be able to draft 'environmental delivery plans (EDPs)' and acquire land compulsorily to bolster conservation efforts. Mr Hinchliff has suggested these EDPs must come with a timeline for their implementation, and that developers should improve the conservation status of any environmental features before causing 'damage' – a proposal which has support from at least 43 cross-party MP backers. MPs will spend two days debating the Bill on Monday and Tuesday. Chris Curtis, the Labour MP for Milton Keynes North, warned that some of Mr Hinchliff's proposals 'if enacted, would deepen our housing crisis and push more families into poverty'. He said: 'I won't stand by and watch more children in the country end up struggling in temporary accommodation to appease pressure groups. No Labour MP should. 'It's morally reprehensible to play games with this issue. 'These amendments should be withdrawn.'
Glasgow Times
7 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Lammy seeks to ‘deepen' UK-India ties on New Delhi visit
Trade and migration will be at the top of the agenda for the Foreign Secretary's trip, during which he will meet Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and external affairs minister S Jaishankar. The Foreign Office said Mr Lammy would also raise 'the recent escalation in tensions following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, and how the welcomed sustained period of peace can be best supported in the interests of stability in the region'. The Foreign Secretary will seek to deepen economic and migration ties with India as he visits New Delhi (Alastair Grant/PA) Pakistan and India agreed to a US-brokered ceasefire last month after rising hostilities between the two nuclear-armed rivals followed a deadly attack on tourists in Pahalgam, Kashmir. Ahead of the visit, Mr Lammy said: 'Signing a free trade agreement is just the start of our ambitions – we're building a modern partnership with India for a new global era. 'We want to go even further to foster an even closer relationship and co-operate when it comes to delivering growth, fostering innovative technology, tackling the climate crisis and delivering our migration priorities, and providing greater security for our people.' The Foreign Office said talks in New Delhi would aim to 'deepen and diversify the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between the two countries'. 'The Foreign Secretary will also welcome progress in our migration partnership, including ongoing work on safeguarding citizens and securing borders in both countries,' it said.
