If defending the Ukraine from Russian aggression means the UK spending more on defence, would you be willing to consider losing the money from the UK's social support spend?

[XingMing]

Do you think the UK, and EU, should confront Putin and Russian aggression at the cost of spending the same on domestic social services? Defence v social spends, in a nutshell?

No because this is just not necessary.

No. Let’s cancel HS2 instead.

Absolutely not, just not necessary.

No because they could just borrow more if they felt it necessary.

And that borrowing could be spread over a long time period as uk gilts are very in demand and considered secure.

The issue of why we aren't isn't really down to defense resource etc though, it's so it doesn't trigger a devastating war that engulfs a fair bit of the world. Although it sounds selfish, it's not like anyone would be able to support Ukraine if their own country was getting battered and it probably would escalate to something nuclear. Also I mean the EU and the UK aren't tied military wise so not too sure on the connection. I think if spending was increased (a lot of the stuff we build here so supports industry and jobs albeit usually at an inflated price), then military personnel should be utilised more effectively.

HS2 from London to Birmingham is probably gilding the lily, but the northern stretches are important IMO.

If the UK confronts Putin, it's a start to WW3 in which case we'll not need to support anyone for very long.

@XingMing

HS2 from London to Birmingham is probably gilding the lily, but the northern stretches are important IMO.

Not much use if the country’s blown to smithereens.

Absolutely not wishing to trigger a war, or even inflame the one in progress. My thought (only a thought) was about a sensible balance between domestic policy (which requires big money) and the defense of the country which also requires big financial commitments. Which takes precedence in your view?

It’s not a bad question as any decisions to increase defence spending take from somewhere else

I learnt today we are quite high up globally for defence spending - fourth or fifth depending on metric - which I was surprised by

So hit the vulnerable again?

You do realise that disabled people have already been hit by the removal of the warm front scheme from people who receive DLA? right so CHILDREN cannot be kept warm this winter?

Get a rich mate to pay boris I think richi has a bit spare

'Warm front scheme' ? Do you mean 'Warm Homes Discount' ? The Government has announced the payment will increase to £150 (maybe more), and be extended to many more households, so spending on it will significantly increase next winter.

@Sacada

'Warm front scheme' ? Do you mean 'Warm Homes Discount' ? The Government has announced the payment will increase to £150 (maybe more), and be extended to many more households, so spending on it will significantly increase next winter.

Yes that's the one they have changed it so I won't get it to help withy bills now despite needing it due to his medical needs

Is this Tory HQ??

Or nudge theory in action?

Not Tory HQ, nor nudge theory, I am interested by the weightings MNetters put on topics. So when loads pile in to the refugee topic, most say why they couldn't help despite wanting other people to step up. we want someone to act, just as long as it doesn't mean us.

No.

What do you mean by social support?

@XingMing - I agree we have to make choices. It is important to me to protect democracy and our way of life and not to give into bullies. So yes, I would be prepared to sacrifice some social spending for defense

What social spending?

If you mean funding for social services, then no. I’d increase taxes, because I don’t see where else you can cut.

What social spending is a good question? I didn't have cuts in mind, but slowing the rates of increase, such as changing the indexing and tapering rates.

?? still not sure what you want cut

The answer which projects moral correctness is to say that we need to spend more on health, more on social services and more on education. And none on nasty Defence stuff because it's not as if we're about to be invaded.

Which ignores the point that an autocrat has chosen to place more than a hundred thousand troops on the border of another European country and then invade it, destroying vast swathes of infrastructure and displacing 2 million people. So far.

I am glad that NATO exists, that we have a nuclear deterrent, and that the UK and other countries can contribute equipment to Ukraine in this situation. I'd also like us to do a better job of welcoming refugees, which also isn't free, and which will squeeze other budgets including those which provide for vulnerable people already in the UK.

Fortunately, it won't be down to me to make any decisions about what might have to be cut to help out the Ukrainians but like some posters, I feel it's important that we provide military support to the Ukrainians trying to defend their country from an invading tyrant and humanitarian aid to the Ukrainian refugees. But where do we find the cash?

I do feel, with @Bwix, that there's a moral dimension that can't be ignored, and that it's wrong to take money from welfare budgets but those are the really major items in government spending on which millions of people rely. And equally that if we value the freedoms of life in a liberal democracy, we should try to help the Ukrainians protect theirs.