Would you pay more tax to boost defence spending

@EasternStandard

"You make a good point because it's not our threat either. If we up defence then why not others who face the same as us"

But logically why would they? There are fewer votes to be gained from boosting spending on defence than say boosting spending on healthcare, pensions or education.

The way NATO is set up of an attack on one NATO country being an attack on all NATO countries simply encourages countries to deprioritise defence spending and rely on other countries to provide your defence.

Sadly when push comes to shove and a real war breaks out such as with Ukraine, everyone makes great speeches of support but are not in a position to provide meaningful military aid.

But equally you could advance the argument (not that I agree with it) that why should the UK be spending more on defence instead of say a Winter Fuel allowance for pensioners when Spain or Croatia or whoever gets to freeload off UK taxpayers boosting our NATO defence spending so that they can spend more on their state pensions, healthcare, education etc.

@1dayatatime I wouldn't be surprised if Merz and others start to ask for more.

Well, its a difficult one, Croatia have a few more tanks or an extra ship or two, will make zero difference to its own or Europes security.... on the other hand, not looking after pensioners could lead to far right/Russian backed parties gaining popularity....

I agree that for the majority of European states (big and small) the threat from Russia is not in the form of tanks crossing the border

You make a good point because it's not our threat either. If we up defence then why not others who face the same as us

@Alexandra2001

"Do you honestly think that Croatia is now thinking "oh we can build some more tourism infrastructure now because the UK has increased its spend by 6 billion over 2 years... phew we are safe!!"

These small states are at risk, not from invasion but from political interference from Russia... see Hungary, look at Serbia?"

No but I do honestly think that Croatia if faced between a difficult political choice of say a long overdue increase in state pensions or increasing defence spending, they will be more inclined to spend it on pensions if they believe that they can rely on another NATO country to provide their defence for them.

I can guarantee that if Croatia was not in NATO then with Serbia just to the south of them they would be spending triple what they currently are.

I agree that for the majority of European states (big and small) the threat from Russia is not in the form of tanks crossing the border but in electoral interference and disruption of infrastructure such as sub sea power cables and internet cables etc.

Well, we can only look after our own interests, carping on about whether Slovenia etc pays a small amount more, is irrelevant...even if these very small economies paid 2.5% or not, it would not change the reality for Europe on the ground one iota.

We need larger economies to up their manufacturing base, that will take time, buildings, machinery and not least a skilled workforce.... we are years away from this...

This should have begun arguably after 2014, it should definitely have started after 2021.

Do you honestly think that Croatia is now thinking "oh we can build some more tourism infrastructure now because the UK has increased its spend by 6 billion over 2 years... phew we are safe!!"

These small states are at risk, not from invasion but from political interference from Russia... see Hungary, look at Serbia?

They should increase too I agree

@Alexandra2001

"The Europeans will increase spend because they are on the front line eg Germany and Poland have been increasing spend long before the UK, just 7 months ago, the UK's main political parties both said there was no need to increase spend now, just vague promises to do so over the next 5 years... ... maybe..."

But looking at the chart the UK was previously spending significantly more (as a % of GDP) than Germany and states that are a lot closer to Russia such as Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia and even Belgium.

My point is that previously these countries didn't need to spend much on defence (as a % of GDP) because they could freeload off US taxpayers paying for their defence.

Although the US is no longer willing to do this, the likes of Spain, Slovenia and Belgium (thanks to yesterday's by Kier Starmer) still don't have to increase their defence spending because they can now freeload off UK taxpayers paying for their defence instead, or more accurately coming from cuts in aid to poor foreign countries.

Indeed. If you look at the coloured map which shows defence spending as a percentage of GDP per country, it's all those bordering Russia that are dark red (i.e. nearing 5%). Those further removed (Spain, Italy) are paltry in comparison.

This is the problem I have with the decision. Starmer has robbed Peter to pay Paul because he's committed to not raising income tax. I don't think he had any option but to commit to spending more on defence, I understand why the decision was made, and I actually think he's stepped up and become a statesman in his handling of Europe and Trump. But I'd prefer to pay more tax so that all our underfunded public services can be improved - and pulling back on oversees aid is a quick 'win' but short sighted. I really hope it does end up being only a short term solution.

The op is likely right they feel more removed than Poland. Not the next best reason anymore.

People really are extremely stupid if they think spending less on foreign aid and climate change makes them safer.

Spain GPD per capita = $33k
UK ..............................= $49k

Spain was a fascist dictatorship just a few years ago... 45 years to be precise.

Europe wont be saved from the Russian hordes by Spain increasing their defence spend.

The Europeans will increase spend because they are on the front line eg Germany and Poland have been increasing spend long before the UK, just 7 months ago, the UK's main political parties both said there was no need to increase spend now, just vague promises to do so over the next 5 years... ... maybe...

Maybe Spain think they are too far away to be impacted by any missiles that might come their way.(sarcasm)

Chart of defence spending

Rather ironically the UK has increased defence spending because the US walked away from providing US taxpayer funded military support to European NATO allies who previously freeload on this and therefore could get away with spending less than 2%.

However by increasing UK defence spending to 2.7 and then 3% these same European NATO countries can now freeload off UK taxpayer funded defence and still not have to increase their defence budgets.

I wonder if in a few years the UK will also strop off, pulling away support from such countries unless they too increase their defence spending!

Lastly seriously what is Spain doing!!

No I'm not Nige and I wish I was tuppence behind him !!

But it seems Labour has taken a leaf out of their book.

Interesting,

Are you secretly Nigel Farage?

Because Reform also had the policy of raiding the foreign aid budget to pay for increased defence spending!

I think Starmer must have read a previous post of mine where i said he should raid the Foreign Aid Budget to increase spending on defence.

PS If he needs me as an advisor I'll be happy to do so and I would advise him to sack the entire front bench for a start...

Not in advance. I'd rather them just spend it if they need to, and then raise taxes after if they need to

@Talonz somehow I don't think Russia or Ukraine can wait 4 years...

Long term I can't comprehend why US wants to poke it's allies and side with Russia and China, other than the obvious temptation to willy wave.

We should not get too wrapped up in Trump as his tenure is 4 years, despite attempts by his team to give him immortality. Not all Republicans are on his side and there are still those that believe in the European relationship (and who are very aware of the sacrifices the US has made for peace). When I see what Trump is doing today, I am reminded of the fables. The tortoise and the hare. The reed and the oak. Trump is trying to go too fast and too brutally. He will tire at some point and something will snap.

I suspect we are going to have to create an EU version of Nato, bypassing US and a lot sooner than 5 years. If anything is going to spark a recession it's needing to prepare for war... Long term I can't comprehend why US wants to poke it's allies and side with Russia and China, other than the obvious temptation to willy wave. I can't see how we can trust them with this government as they clearly don't have the same goals for global peace. I certainly wouldn't want to be giving them intel about Russia or China at the moment as it would likely be sent to them on a postcard.

Not content with letting Europe and the UK sort their own defence out, it now seems good time for US companies to take over British defence companies. Bains has offered £1 billion for Chemring, which has been rejected. We may see - and I hope it is seriously considered - some changes to the takeover code to bar foreign companies from taking control of our defence stocks.

Where is Heseltine when we need him.