Oral Answers to Questions

Kemi Badenoch Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

That was a very interesting answer from the Prime Minister. Lord Robertson, who authored the Government’s strategic defence review, has said that the Prime Minister has a “corrosive complacency” when it comes to defence. Why did he say that?

[The Prime Minister]

Let me start by saying that I respect Lord Robertson, and I thank him again for carrying out the strategic review. My responsibility is to keep the British people safe, and that is a duty I take seriously. That is why I do not agree with his comments.

Last February—seven months after taking office—I took the decision to increase defence spending from 2.3% to 2.6%, which was paid for by a difficult decision on overseas aid. Last June at the NATO summit, I committed to raising core defence spending to 3.5%. Last November, the Budget committed record funding to defence. I reaffirm those commitments now.

The strategic defence review is a 10-year blueprint for national security. The defence investment plan will put that into effect, and it will be published as soon as possible. We need to get it right. We inherited plans that were uncosted and undeliverable, and we are not going to repeat those mistakes.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister says that he does not agree with Lord Robertson. Lord Robertson is a former Labour Defence Secretary and a former NATO Secretary-General. He also said:

“We are underprepared. We are underinsured. We are under attack.”

He said—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I do not think it looks good to shout somebody down at the Dispatch Box.

[Mrs Badenoch]

Lord Robertson’s criticisms were of the Prime Minister, and he said that Britain’s national security is “in peril”. Our armed forces are at the end of their tether, waiting for this Government to fund the strategic defence review. There are still two weeks of the parliamentary Session left, so why will the Prime Minister not publish the defence investment plan before the Session ends?

[The Prime Minister]

I remind the House that we have put in place the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the cold war. Let me spell that out: that means we are spending £270 billion over this Parliament. That is £5 billion more this year, with defence funding increasing every year. These are record amounts—decisions of a Labour Prime Minister, a Labour Chancellor and a Labour Government.

What a contrast: when the Conservatives came into office, defence spending was 2.5%; when they left, it was 2.3%. When they came into office, the Army numbered 100,000; when they left, it was 72,000. They cut frigates and destroyers by 25%. They cut minehunters by 50%. The Leader of the Opposition said at the weekend that our defence is the “weakest in 400 years.” That is what they left behind.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister is talking about the biggest sustained increase. Talking about an increase is not the same as giving an increase. The military and the defence industry want to hear about what he is going to do, not hear him prosecuting past Governments. He promised that the defence investment plan would be published last autumn. I asked him at Prime Minister’s questions six weeks ago when it would be published—he had no idea. It is now the middle of April. What is the hold-up?

[The Prime Minister]

I have set out my position. The defence investment plan is the first line-by-line review of defence budgets for 18 years. The Leader of the Opposition talks about talking; if you are going to support your country and make it safe, you have to make the right calls on the big issues. She called for us to jump into the war. The Conservatives can pretend otherwise, but I remember walking into this Chamber, standing at the Dispatch Box for the first time on the matter and saying that we would not get drawn into the war and would not join the offensive, and they all shouted, “Shame!” They remember it. I remember it. They are just embarrassed by it now.

A week later, when the Leader of the Opposition realised that she had made a massive error of judgment, she attempted the mother of all U-turns. That did not work, so this weekend, she said that when she said we should jump into the war, she was talking about “verbal support”—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Prime Minister, it is Prime Minister’s questions. We have got to concentrate. I call Kemi Badenoch.

[Mrs Badenoch]

The Prime Minister loves to misrepresent my position on Iran. Let us stop talking about what I did not say. Let us start talking about what he is not doing. Mr Speaker, you will recall that on Monday, I offered to work with the Prime Minister to identify the welfare savings we need. What did he say? “No thanks.” Now that Lord Robertson has said,

“We cannot defend Britain with an ever-expanding welfare budget”,

will the Prime Minister think again and work with us to find savings to fund defence?

[The Prime Minister]

The Leader of the Opposition was clear in what she was saying. She said we should give “verbal support”; I suppose that is standing on the sidelines and saying, “Get in there. Good luck, mate. You’ve got this.” That is her approach. We are reforming welfare and spending more on defence; the Conservatives did neither. The welfare bill rose by £88 billion on their watch. It soared by £33 billion on the shadow Chancellor’s watch. We are fixing it—what did the Conservatives do? They voted against it. They voted to keep the broken system. Taking advice from the Conservative party on reforming welfare and defence spending is like asking Liz Truss how to keep your mortgage down.

[Mrs Badenoch]

This is so poor from the Prime Minister—[Laughter.] Labour MPs are laughing, but this is a moment of profound national seriousness. And what are they doing? They are promoting sex toys in Parliament. It gives a whole new meaning to fiddling while Rome burns. [Interruption.] That is what they are doing, Mr Speaker.

Let us get back to the issue of the defence investment plan and defence spending. It is being reported that the Treasury is asking the Ministry of Defence to make £3.5 billion of cuts this year. The Prime Minister will not fund our military, because he wants to fund more welfare. That is why he has a welfare plan to 2031, but no defence investment plan at all. Now that the Chagos surrender deal is dead, will the Prime Minister put the billions saved from ditching Chagos into defence, or is that going into welfare as well?

[The Prime Minister]

We are spending more on defence—record amounts—with £270 billion in this Parliament, and £5 billion extra. The Leader of the Opposition talks about the Chancellor. It is because of the decisions of this Chancellor that we have the biggest boost to defence spending since the cold war. We have also got the biggest pay rise for our armed forces for over 20 years. We have also got the biggest investment in military housing for more than half a century. What did the Conservatives do at the Budget? They voted against all of that.

[Mrs Badenoch]

It sounds like the Prime Minister does not want to spend the Chagos money on defence. Labour MPs will know Lord Robertson, a former Defence Secretary and a former NATO Secretary-General. He is Labour through and through. They all need to think about why he stuck his head above the parapet. I went through the strategic defence review with Lord Robertson last year. The Lib Dems and Reform refused to meet him. No other party is taking this seriously.

I want to ask the Prime Minister a very specific question. In January 2024, the Conservatives approved an upgrade of destroyers, like HMS Dragon, so that they can better intercept ballistic missiles. In July 2024, the Prime Minister paused that plan. Will he immediately approve and fund that critical upgrade now?

[The Prime Minister]

HMS Dragon was commissioned by a Labour Government, as it happens. The Leader of the Opposition stands there and says, “Please forget the fact that we hollowed out the armed forces. Please clear up our mess.” I went to the Gulf last week and thanked our armed forces for protecting British lives. She said that we should have jumped into the war, without thinking about the consequences, and then said the next week, “Oh no, we shouldn’t be in the war.” [Interruption.] Now she says, “What I meant was that we should give verbal support”—