Nato boss heaps pressure on Burnham to up defence spending as unions join clamour to invest 3% of GDP in military
Developed over time first seen 4 hours ago
Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte is set to press new Prime Minister Andy Burnham to increase UK defence spending during talks in Downing Street, with a speech at the Ditchley Foundation praising Britain's approach to security while pointedly noting it must go further. The intervention adds to pressure already building from within Labour's own ranks, as trade unions split over whether military spending should rise, with Unite arguing it would support jobs and industry while the University and College Union insists funds should go to schools, housing and climate action instead.
UK defence spending is projected to reach around 2.7 per cent of GDP by 2027, but Burnham has been accused of avoiding commitment to an interim Nato target of 3 per cent by 2030, having refused to cut welfare spending to fund the increase. Nato members have collectively agreed to raise defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP by 2035 amid concerns over Russia and pressure from the US, while former defence secretary John Healey resigned in June over Sir Keir Starmer's earlier refusal to commit to the 3 per cent goal.
- Nato chief Rutte pushes Burnham to raise UK defence spending
- Unions split: Unite wants more spending, UCU wants welfare priorities
- UK aims for 2.7% of GDP by 2027, Nato targets 5% by 2035
Full account
Sir Andy Burnham is coming under intensifying pressure over the pace of Britain's defence build-up, with Nato's secretary-general and two of Labour's biggest union backers weighing in from opposing directions within the same week. Mark Rutte, the alliance's chief, is set to press the case for faster investment in the UK's armed forces, while Unite and the University and College Union have staked out starkly different positions on how, or whether, the government should divert more money towards the military.
Accounts differ on exactly where and when Rutte intends to deliver his message. One report places him at the Ditchley Foundation's annual lecture in Oxfordshire, using the platform to commend Britain as serious about security while noting pointedly that the country is already spending more and that he welcomes assurances that Nato commitments will be honoured. Another account instead describes a face-to-face meeting in London at which Rutte is expected to press the prime minister directly. Either way, the underlying message is the same: allies want firmer proof that spending will keep rising. UK defence spending is forecast to reach around 2.7 per cent of GDP by 2027, short of an interim 3 per cent goal set for 2030, and well below the 5 per cent ceiling Nato members have agreed to work towards over the coming decade. The Treasury's task is complicated by higher borrowing costs linked to the conflict between the US and Iran, alongside competing demands on public spending. Burnham has already ruled out funding any increase by cutting welfare, arguing that social security should not be sacrificed for national security.
The unions are far from unified on the issue. Sharon Graham of Unite wants a firm commitment to 3 per cent of GDP by 2030, arguing that the defence sector should anchor a wider reindustrialisation of Britain and warning that firms and workers are already weighing whether to stay in the UK given the uncertainty. Jo Grady of the UCU took the opposite line at the TUC's annual congress in Brighton, backing a 'wages not weapons' motion that would redirect resources towards climate action, housing, education and public ownership of utilities rather than the military. She argued that lucrative contracts for firms such as BAE Systems do nothing to make people feel safer and that every pound spent on arms is a pound not spent on tackling homelessness, schools, the NHS or crumbling infrastructure.
The two union leaders also diverged in how they framed the human cost of past conflicts and present ones. Grady invoked Britain's losses in Afghanistan and Iraq, where more than 600 troops died, to argue that veterans had returned traumatised rather than triumphant, and rejected the idea that she needed forceful displays of military strength to feel protected. She was also reported to have criticised Western and Israeli conduct in relation to Iran. Separately, officials have reportedly warned that conflict could reach British shores within five years, a claim cited to underline the urgency ministers face in setting out a clear timetable, even as Downing Street tries to balance that urgency against strained public finances and a fractious coalition of political and union voices pulling in different directions.
Where outlets differ
The two reports place Rutte's intervention in different settings and times: one has him addressing the Ditchley Foundation lecture in Oxfordshire that evening, quoting him praising the UK as 'serious about security'; the other describes a London meeting on the Wednesday with no direct Rutte quotes given.
Only one account cites defence officials warning that war could reach Britain's shores within five years, giving that report a more urgent framing.
The reports emphasise different parts of Jo Grady's remarks: one focuses on her criticism of US and Israeli conduct toward Iran and the 'wages not weapons' campaign; the other foregrounds her comments on the human toll of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and her rejection of macho posturing on defence.
One source has Sharon Graham's comments attributed to an interview with Politico, discussing employers and workers deciding whether to remain in Britain, while the other presents her remarks in more general terms without that attribution.
More coverage