Wow, I am surprised by the flippancy some of these responses. I'd like to make these points:
First, the primary duty of government is to keep the country safe from external threat. While this has been the case for centuries the nature of the threat has changed over time.
We may not longer be at such risk of being invaded but we might, for instance, be at the risk of our banks being hacked by Russians and individuals money being stolen en masse. Or our telecoms networks taken down. I think it's hard to imagine the disruption and panic that would engender. And it's not so far fetched.
Second, what prevents bad actor countries doing this to others are two things. Preparedness and deterrence. That we have taken steps to make it very hard to do these (and other things) and that the consequences that would befall the bad actor country in retaliation if they did it to us would be equally if not more painful.
As an American president once said "speak softly and carry a big stick".
Right now I worry that our preparedness is weak (remember M&S last year - imagine the same affecting every bank) and I know our deterrence is weak.
Third, one point that has not come up above is how under-investing in defence makes us more not less vulnerable to nuclear war. Nuclear war is supposed to be a last and unthinkable resort against existential threat. By reducing conventional defence, the point at which a threat becomes existential is reduced. So reducing defence spending reduces the nuclear threshold. Dangerous for all of us.
Fourth, some posters have been very ready to see this through a party political lens. It is true and equally reprehensible that previous governments have not dealt with this issue. What makes this particularly traitorous by Labour though, to use the word I used earlier, is that this was a set piece opportunity to correct previous errors and it looks like they are going to just duck it. I think that is a fundamental dereliction of their basic duty.
Fifth, other posters have pointed to waste in the MoD. I agree with this too. As with all our public services they have been asked to do too much and broaden themselves from their core mission.
I'd also readily agree that along with our other public services the MoD is hideously inefficient and atrociously managed. Fundamental reform is needed across the MoD, NHS, police, courts service and so on. Labour are ducking this too.
Finally, I have been surprised by there being so many comments about benefits. I don't want to turn this into a thread about benefits but it is very surprising to me that people don't see that the ability to have a generous benefits system is the result of having a strong, safe country that has a solid legal system, is attractive to business and a place where people want to raise their families.
The long term assured ability to choose to pay generous benefits is a consequence of a secure economically successful state. If we do not have both continued security and sufficient continued economic success to make it affordable then cuts to benefits are inevitable whether people like it or not.
Currently, factually, we certainly do not have the second of those things and are at risk of not having the first either.
Dangers ahead!