Andy Burnham pivoted from questioning about defence spending at PMQs on Wednesday to robustly defend his decision to sanction Israeli settlements, saying that it amounted to “leadership” on the world stage.
Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch used the bulk of her questioning to scrutinise Labour’s plans for defence spending and encouraged him to commit to spending three per cent of GDP on defence by the end of the decade.
Burnham’s chancellor, John Healey, resigned as defence secretary in Sir Keir Starmer’s government in protest at the lack of investment in defence.
In his resignation letter in June, he said: “I am certain that a headmark date for 3 per cent of GDP on defence in 2030 is what Britain must set. This commitment would have strong cross-party support. Other European allies are stepping up in this way.”
However, Burnham’s government has refused to commit to match the commitment previously demanded by Healey.
The prime minister said that the government “will be willing to provide that funding to our armed forces to back our defence investment plan”, adding: “This government's commitment to the defence of this country is absolute.”
He declined Kemi Badenoch’s urging to cut welfare spending in order to pay for defence, telling MPs: “Yes, we do everything to support our national security, but it can't come at the expense of social security. Having strong national security also depends upon having resilience in our communities. This side of the house will not be forced to choose between the two, and we will set out a plan to get to 3.5 per cent by 2035 at the spending review.”
The Conservative Party leader accused the prime minister of projecting weakness on the international stage and his decision to continue with Sir Keir Starmer’s controversial agreement with Mauritius over the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands, which would see Britain handing over territory and paying Mauritius for the use of a strategically important military base in Diego Garcia.
“Where Britain needs leadership, what we have at the moment is just vibes. He said he appointed the chancellor because he cares about defence, but he won't fund it. Other countries are making claims over our sovereign territory. They smell weakness.
“He's pretending that he's the change candidate, but the fact is he's still failing to cut welfare. He's still paying to hand over a sovereign territory; he is still not funding defence. So, on the issues that really matter, isn't he just continuity Keir?”
Burnham responded by saying that the stance his government took on sanctioning Israeli settlements was of leadership on the international stage.
“Let me tell her and the whole House where Britain is showing leadership. There have been Conservative politicians at this dispatch box, Labour politicians too, for decades, who've talked about the importance of the two-state solution between Israel and Palestine.
“Words from any politician about a two-state solution will be only words if it's not backed with action, and leadership is about taking action where there is injustice, where we need to correct unfairness, people being driven out of their homes, losing their homes, being intimidated in their daily lives.”
He also praised Conservative MP Sir Edward Leigh for backing the government’s announcement, adding: “Britain has to stand for something. Britain has to show leadership. Britain has to stand for fairness against injustice. Where people are being bullied out of their homes, intimidated, we will always stand with the underdog and take what action we can to support them.
He went on: “That, Mr Speaker, is leadership on the world stage. Britain being true to what it's always been about. That is what the British government, British people expect of us, and that is what this government will do.”
Also, at PMQs, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey welcomed the government’s sanctions announcement, saying they were “something Keir Starmer should have done a long time ago”.
Veteran Conservative backbencher Sir Bernard Jenkin questioned the potential impact of the government’s new measures on British national security.
He told MPs: “Despite long and historic disagreements between successive UK governments in Israel, they have remained a steadfast ally in the counter-terrorist effort to keep our people safe in this country, and we are now embarked, it seems, on a full diplomatic dispute with Israel and tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats.
“What advice was the Foreign Office itself giving ministers on this matter, and what advice were the security services giving about our national security interest before this decision was taken?”
The prime minister responded that the government had taken “the most careful consideration” including “close advice from the security services and, of course, officials in the Foreign Office and in our embassies”.
He went on to say: “The risk of the collapse of the two-state solution is a risk that should concern us all in terms of the effect that that would have on the Middle East. The risk is that it is dying before our eyes, and that requires us to have the courage to act in the world that we're in. If Britain loses the confidence to lead on the world stage, then where will we be?”
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.