LONDON — Cabinet ministers have been instructed to identify departmental savings to finance an increase in defence spending. This development follows the resignation of defence secretary John Healey last week and the subsequent appointment of Dan Jarvis to the role.

Healey resigned in response to a defence investment plan settlement that was smaller than anticipated. In his resignation letter, Healey said: "I could not accept a Dip settlement that does not give our forces the resources they need." Dan Jarvis, who replaced Healey as defence secretary, has been directed to submit an alternative defence investment plan prior to the upcoming NATO summit in Ankara.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer offered an additional £2bn for defence spending. He also declined to establish a target date for defence spending to reach 3% of GDP, a target that is expected to be set after the next general election.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy stated that the defence investment plan remains under review. Nandy said her department is discussing additional defence funding allocations with the Treasury. Nandy said, "It’s the responsibility of all of us to do what is the first duty of any government, which is to keep this country safe." She indicated that certain cultural sector programs will be protected from budget reductions due to national resilience requirements. Nandy stated that funding for the BBC will not be reduced to address disinformation that affects national resilience. Nandy confirmed that Starmer proceeded with the international aid funding reduction despite internal reservations.

Al Carns resigned as armed forces minister on Thursday. Carns stated in writing that the proposed defence funding level is insufficient, saying: "I tried to change things from within the system. I made the arguments and pushed where the machinery allowed me to push. But the machinery is not built to move at the speed the world now demands." Carns stated that allocating 2.68% of GDP to defence by 2030 does not adequately address fundamental changes in warfare and that the target was determined by the Treasury rather than military threat assessments.