{"id":59899,"date":"2026-06-06T19:23:07","date_gmt":"2026-06-06T23:23:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/newssprinters.com\/index.php\/world\/delays-to-defence-plan-undermine-uk-credibility-mps-say\/06\/06\/2026\/"},"modified":"2026-06-06T19:23:07","modified_gmt":"2026-06-06T23:23:07","slug":"delays-to-defence-plan-undermine-uk-credibility-mps-say","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newssprinters.com\/index.php\/world\/delays-to-defence-plan-undermine-uk-credibility-mps-say\/06\/06\/2026\/","title":{"rendered":"Delays to defence plan undermine UK credibility, MPs say"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n<\/p>\n

\n

Delays in publishing a report laying out government defence spending have undermined the UK’s credibility with its allies, a parliamentary committee that scrutinises public spending says.<\/p>\n

The Defence Investment Plan (DIP) was supposed to be published in the autumn but is now due to be released ahead of a Nato summit early next month.<\/p>\n

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) says the hold-up means procuring the latest equipment will be more expensive, “hindering the government’s attempt to modernise the Armed Forces”.<\/p>\n

A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman said the DIP would “fix the outdated, overcommitted and underfunded programme we inherited”, adding: “We are working hard to finalise it.”<\/p>\n

The DIP will explain how new equipment and defence infrastructure will be funded over the coming decade and follows the wide-ranging Strategic Defence Review (SDR) published on 2 June 2025<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Defence Secretary John Healey told the Commons on Monday that Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer was “determined to publish”<\/a> it.<\/p>\n

The chair of the PAC, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, said that from the committee’s point of view, the nation had “now in fact gone years without a credible plan for UK military capability”.<\/p>\n

“Those responsible may argue there are good reasons for the DIP’s continuing absence, but our report makes clear that excuses to the effect of ‘taking the time to get the details right’ simply do not cut it.”<\/p>\n

The PAC report said the DIP’s delay had been “due to the lack of a decision from the MoD as to which capabilities, infrastructure and people it requires to transform the Armed Forces to be warfighting-ready”.<\/p>\n

It said defence contractors were raising prices because of global instability, meaning delays to procurement could end up costing more.<\/p>\n

Delaying the release of the DIP also meant an “inability to equip the UK’s Armed Forces for the modern battlefield” and provide a stronger deterrent, undermining the MoD’s credibility with the UK’s allies as well as the defence sector.<\/p>\n

In response, the MoD spokesman said that, since coming to power in July 2024, the government had signed more than 1,400 major defence contracts, adding it was providing “a generational increase in defence spending… ensuring no return to the hollowed out armed forces of the past”.<\/p>\n

The PAC report also highlighted specific concerns over existing defence spending, including ongoing issues with the Ajax armoured vehicle.<\/p>\n

In November 2025, the army had to pause its use of the Ajaxes<\/a> after soldiers became unwell from the noise and vibration issues, with some vomiting after leaving the vehicle.<\/p>\n

The PAC report found a total of 33 soldiers had been affected by the issues, with five still under medical review as of March.<\/p>\n

It said the MoD now expected soldiers to conduct maintenance checks every time they stopped the vehicles, which was “unreasonable” given that they might need to use the vehicles for long periods in combat operations.<\/p>\n

It called on the MoD to explain how the current operating restrictions were realistic and appropriate.<\/p>\n

“With an Ajax 2 package of upgrades now in development at an unknown cost, the PAC awaits to see, more in hope than expectation, whether these endeavours will succeed,” the report states.<\/p>\n

The Ajaxes currently in use are for trial purposes only. It is understood the government is proceeding cautiously with the programme and knows it has to rebuild confidence in the vehicles before they are put in service.<\/p>\n

The PAC report also raised concerns about the MoD not providing “sufficient transparency over its ever-increasing nuclear expenditure”.<\/p>\n

The MoD spent 18% (\u00a310.9 billion) of its defence budget on the UK’s nuclear deterrent, which is expected to rise as high as 25% of the budget in the coming years, it found.<\/p>\n

The UK is currently constructing new Dreadnought-class submarines to carry Trident nuclear missiles at an estimated cost of \u00a331bn – though recent tests of the US-made missiles have failed.<\/p>\n

The PAC said the MoD must set out how and when it will provide Parliament with more detailed cost and performance information about the UK’s nuclear programme.<\/p>\n

Its report said the MoD’s accounts showed “a completely unacceptable failure to maintain accounting records to support \u00a36bn+ of assets”.<\/p>\n

It is understood that the MoD’s position is that the \u00a36.1bn discrepancy relates to how funds paid over the past 15 years should be accounted for now.<\/p>\n

The PAC’s report makes six recommendations for the MoD:<\/p>\n