A defence circus like no other: the UK and its DIP
- The Defence Investment Plan was due in Q3 2025, before slipping inexorably through winter and possibly the spring
- Delays to defence spending by the UK Government is an act of “self-harm”, according to the union Unite
- The UK Government cannot develop a coherent narrative as it lurches from one crisis to the next
Amid increasing uncertainty among UK defence suppliers at the continued absence of the long-awaited Defence Investment Plan (DIP), a lack of clarity by the UK Government regarding when the document will be published continues to add to the confusion.
In a Hansard written parliamentary response published on 26 February, Luke Pollard, UK Minster for Defence Readiness and Industry, responding to a question regarding a specific defence programme, said the DIP would be published “this year”.
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
Find out more
This is a slight departure from the usual refrain from Pollard in his Hansard responses, who typically states that the Ministry of Defence “is working flat out to deliver the DIP, which will be published as soon as possible”.
Any observers of Hansard, which is the official Q&A forum of the UK Parliament, will twitch at the sight of the phrase, which is developing its own distinct memetic quality.
Previous questioning in the House of Commons from opposition MPs of the government’s inability to meet its own deadlines have become lost in semantics, as officials began to claim the slip to the winter of 2025 was still in the same calendar year, before that too moved into 2026.
However, the lack of clarity from the UK Government is threatening to undermine its aspirations to use defence spending as a vehicle for economic growth, as key programmes remain under threat from expected cuts.
On 25 February, the general secretary of the powerful workers union Unite said the UK Treasury was putting thousands of defence jobs and national security at risk through its intransigence.
The same day, hundreds of defence and aerospace workers descended on Westminster to protest at “dithering” over spending commitments.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “One year ago today the prime minister promised that increased defence spending would translate into British jobs, British skills, British growth and innovation. This promise has not been kept.”
Continuing, Graham said the UK Government was performing an act of “self-harm” on the country’s defence sector.
“The Treasury’s delay to promised defence funding is the latest in a long line of bad decisions, including winter fuel, allowing British refineries to close, and a jobless net zero transition,” Graham added.
A release published by Unite said a petition was handed to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, with “nearly ten thousand workers” urging the UK Government to invest in domestic manufacturing.
UK defence: what is going on?
The ongoing delays to the publication of the DIP, potentially now in March, but possible much later if the “this year” comment by Pollard is to be taken as a timeline slip, is placing the UK Government in a considerable dilemma.
On the one hand, officials have been quick to state that work on the DIP is being performed at pace. However, it is well understood that a funding tug-of-war is ongoing between the Ministry of Defence and the Treasury over defence spending, with the UK economy in a dire state and showing no signs of improvement.
It is unknown how the UK Government intended to square the circle of a claimed increase in defence spending while at the same time embarking on cuts to military personnel, artillery, aircraft, navy frigates, and much more.
One defence industry own goal scored by the UK Government was made in the decision to acquire a small number of F-35A stealth fighters, rather than invest in the extant Eurofighter production line.
A purchase of additional Eurofighters would have secured more jobs than the F-35 purchase, with the latter platform predominantly made in the United States.
Uncertainty continues to linger over the planned New Medium Helicopter programme, with the last remaining UK site capable of building rotary-wing platforms at risk of being undercut by off-the-shelf acquisitions of UH-60 Black Hawks, again from the US.
It is expected that key naval programmes will also come under the knife, further reducing the size and capability of the UK Armed Forces.
Pollard has previously disclosed that a key UK defence procurement reform, introducing a segmented approach to acquisition, would be made public on 1 April this year, apparently ignorant of the irony of an April Fool’s Day release.
Parliamentarians have already publicly called on the government to offer “timely, accurate information to support effective scrutiny of defence acquisition, expenditure, and military capability”, a responsibility that has become “increasingly difficult” for MPs.
In a government struggling to develop a coherent narrative as it lurches from crisis to crisis, U-turn to U-turn, aspirations for the rejuvenation of a UK defence sector appear increasingly forlorn.
With a military featuring more capability gaps than there are potholes in the average UK road, the prospects for the country’s defence sector appear grim, as off-the-shelf temptations offer fast solutions for today’s problems, but at the expense of tomorrow.
Additional reporting by John Hill.
