Britain faces “serious consequences” if the government fails to increase military spending, the new chairman of the country's main defense trade body has warned.
David Lockwood, chief executive of defense firm Babcock, has warned in an article in the Telegraph that the “peace dividend” enjoyed after the Second World War is over.
He points out that at the end of the Cold War, the figure was 4%, amid a debate within the Conservative Party over whether to increase defense spending to 2.5% or 3% of GDP.
The Conservative Party, which has been pressuring Rishi Sunak to commit to increasing defense spending in his general election manifesto, is likely to jump at the intervention.
The prime minister has promised to raise defense spending to 2.5% of GDP from the current 2.3%. However, the date by which the goal will be achieved has not been disclosed.
The Telegraph revealed earlier this month that former Conservative defense secretaries Sir Michael Fallon, Gavin Williamson and Ben Wallace wanted a 3% commitment in their manifesto.
Mr Lockwood will become the new president of ADS Group, the UK's aerospace, defence, security and space industry trade body.
He writes: “Much of the recent debate has been about how much of GDP should be spent on defence. I believe there is a compelling case for increasing the amount. The current increase in the budget is due to increased demand. does not match.
“Both 2.5% and 3% of GDP have been proposed, and the question of the appropriate numbers is important. But to put these percentages into context, in 1991, when the Cold War ended, UK defense spending It was 4.1 percent of GDP.”
Protecting the people is the first priority
Lockwood points out that there are many other pressures on public spending across Whitehall, but insists that “at a fundamental level, government's first responsibility is to protect its people.” do.
He further adds: “Without that security, little else is possible. Increased spending to combat the growing threat environment must be an immediate political priority.
“Whatever the final figure is, the fact is simple: the need for real investment in UK defense is greater than at any time in recent decades.”
Lockwood concludes his article with a warning of what could happen if funding does not increase and the government's approach becomes more long-term, amid rising geopolitical tensions.
He writes: “This is not just about increasing proportions. We are moving away from a historical laissez-faire approach that has led to capacity lags and capacity hollowing, to delivering increased availability and supply chain security.
“It will take time, but failure to act could have serious implications for our future security.
“The best time to do this was 15 years ago.”
“As the world's leading power, the UK must always be at the forefront when it comes to our national security.
“The best time to do this was 15 years ago when global threat levels started to rise. The next best time is now.”
That argument could well be countered by critics who point out that Lockwood heads a defense company that could benefit from more government spending in that area.
But his intervention comes amid a heated political debate over whether and by how much defense spending should increase in the coming years.
Lawmakers from all parties have pointed to the recent escalation in geopolitical tensions, marking the second anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Labor shares the Conservative Party's ambition to increase defense spending to 2.5%, but has not said when it would reach that level if it comes to power.
————————————————– ———————————-
The need for real investment in UK defense has never been greater in recent decades.
Written by David Lockwood
You don't have to work in the defense industry to know that the world has become a more difficult and dangerous place.
For decades we enjoyed the benefits of peace. Now we are once again facing threats around the world. From war in Europe to rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific to the deteriorating situation in Gaza and the continued struggle to secure vital shipping lanes, the future is increasingly uncertain.
Diplomacy and peaceful negotiations have always been the best solutions to the problems facing the world, but recent years have shown that they do not always work.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Britain and our allies must be ready to stand up and protect our way of life. However, it takes time to develop the capabilities and products that support our actions. The threat is here and now, but defense companies haven't caught up with our new reality.
It is no surprise that we are currently having a meaningful national discussion about the importance of defense. This is a conversation we need to have, and I hope it continues in the next general election campaign.
Much of the recent debate is about how much of GDP should be spent on defense. I believe there are compelling cases to increase the amount. Current budget growth does not match demand growth.
The question of the appropriate number is important, with both 2.5 percent and 3 percent of GDP proposed. However, to put these percentages into context, in 1991, when the Cold War ended, Britain's defense spending was 4.1% of her GDP. Over the next 30 years, spending declined year by year as successive governments accumulated peace dividends.
Governments are facing a variety of pressures to increase spending in sectors other than defense. The costs of the pandemic will be felt for years to come. Medical expenses, social security, and pensions are increasing due to an aging society. And falling birth rates are exacerbating these problems. Politicians must make the difficult decisions necessary to balance all competing demands on public finances.
But at a fundamental level, a government's first responsibility is to protect its people.
Without that security, anything else is almost impossible. Increased spending to combat the growing threat environment must be an immediate political priority. Whatever the final number, the fact is simple. The need for real investment in Britain's defense has never been greater in recent decades.
Increasing public interest in defense provides governments with an opportunity to ensure they build defense resilience. they should receive it. This is not just about how we buy equipment, how we recruit and support our military, but how we foster collective pride in our national commitment to defending our nation. This is also a problem.
Government and industry have a critical role to play in getting equipment into the hands of those on the front lines. We need to become leaner, move faster in procurement, and be able to adapt to the ever-changing nature of conflict.
This is not just about increasing the percentage. We need to shift our mindset from a historical laissez-faire approach that has led to capacity lag and capacity hollowing to long-term resilience that enables us to improve availability and ensure supply chain security. Is required. .
It will take time, but failure to take action can have serious implications for your future safety.
As the world's leading power, the UK must always be at the forefront when it comes to our national security.
The best time to do this was 15 years ago, when global threat levels began to rise. The next best time is now.
David Lockwood OBE is Chairman of ADS, the UK trade body for defence, aerospace, security and space.
