Keir Starmer\u2019s decision to cut billions of pounds of infrastructure spending to pay for more defence equipment will end up costing the UK 10,000 jobs, according to an analysis of the government\u2019s own figures.<\/p>\n
The prime minister announced this week<\/a> he was putting an extra \u00a315bn into defence investment to revamp the country\u2019s armed forces and boost British manufacturing.<\/p>\n The long-awaited defence investment plan (Dip) was designed to cement Starmer\u2019s legacy in foreign policy and security as he prepares to depart Downing Street. But it also raised questions about where the funding would come from, given \u00a36.8bn is being raised by unidentified cuts to departmental investment programmes and another \u00a34.7bn is entirely unaccounted for<\/a>.<\/p>\n The analysis, by researchers at the Transition Security Project, shows that while the extra defence investment will generate about 10,000 jobs by 2029-30, taking the money away from other sectors will cost nearly double that.<\/p>\n The findings cast doubt on claims by Starmer and his chancellor, Rachel Reeves<\/a>, that they are boosting British jobs by reallocating large chunks of government spending to the Ministry of Defence.<\/p>\n Khem Rogaly, the co-author of the report, said: \u201cThe idea that military spending can provide a defence dividend is misleading: job losses will result from this latest funding settlement while the opportunity cost of military spending is sharp.<\/p>\n \u201cFar more jobs are created when investing in public needs like health, education and addressing the climate crisis. This latest data suggests that the turn towards autonomous weapons and AI could also mean that military spending creates even fewer jobs per pound than before.\u201d<\/p>\n Andrea Egan, the general secretary of Unison<\/a>, the country\u2019s largest trade union, said: \u201cThis timely analysis highlights how making cuts to government departments to bankroll more military spending will result in job losses. This costly and wasteful plan means extra cash for war and overseas interventions, but less for schools and hospitals.\u201d<\/p>\n A government spokesperson said: \u201cDefence is an engine for growth \u2013 supporting 272,000 jobs and over 25,000 MoD apprenticeships. The plan will back British workers, businesses and innovation, generate economic growth, create nearly 60,000 new jobs and increase defence exports.<\/p>\n \u201cBut we are in a new era of threat, which demands a new era of defence, and crucially our defence investment plan will energise the transformation of our armed forces to rebuild war-fighting readiness and target our resources, ensuring we are ready to face future threats.\u201d<\/p>\n Starmer unveiled the Dip on Tuesday after nearly a year of internal arguments<\/a> over how much extra money the military needed and where it would come from. The disagreements ended up with the resignation of the defence secretary, John Healey<\/a>, just as the plan was due to be announced.<\/p>\n Military bosses originally asked for an additional \u00a328bn over four years, but Starmer and Reeves eventually agreed to put in an extra \u00a315bn, much of which will be spent on maintaining and upgrading the UK\u2019s nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n The announcement prompted another row after it emerged \u00a36.8bn was being taken from unidentified parts of other departments\u2019 capital spending, while another \u00a34.7bn was due to be allocated at the next budget.<\/p>\n The funding gap will have to be solved by Starmer\u2019s successor as prime minister, most likely to be Andy Burnham. The new MP for Makerfield \u2060said on \u200bThursday \u200che \u200cwas committed to ensuring \u2060defence spending \u200bcommitments were \u200bproperly \u200bfinanced if he \u200bbecame \u200cprime \u200bminister.<\/p>\n Andy Burnham told Andrew Marr on LBC radio he would take his responsibility to fully fund the defence spending plan seriously. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau\/PA<\/p>\n \u201cI will take my responsibility to fully fund the defence spending plan seriously,\u201d he told Andrew Marr on LBC radio, while also confirming he had not been made aware of the shortfall before Starmer\u2019s announcement.<\/p>\n The government has said the biggest cuts will come from the energy and transport departments, both of which have high levels of capital spending. Two road improvement projects have already been stopped, while energy officials are looking at reductions to schemes such as home insulation and carbon capture and storage.<\/p>\n