Defence Secretary Wes Streeting has repeatedly declined to confirm whether the government will meet the target of allocating 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to defence spending by 2030. During multiple media interviews, including with BBC’s Today programme, Times Radio, and Sky News, Streeting avoided committing to the specific goal, emphasizing the importance of fiscal discipline and the need to outline funding methods before making spending promises.

Streeting’s reluctance follows similar positions from Labour figures Andy Burnham and John Healey. Burnham, currently serving as Chancellor under Labour leader Keir Starmer, and Healey, who resigned as defence secretary in protest over the party’s defence investment plan (DIP), have previously refrained from endorsing the 3 percent target within the next decade. Healey stepped down in the final weeks of the previous Labour government, criticizing the delayed and unclear DIP, which did not establish a timeline for reaching the 3 percent threshold. He argued at the time that such spending was essential to maintain Britain’s security in the face of renewed Russian threats and to keep pace with European allies.

Streeting acknowledged the Prime Minister’s commitment to fully funding the defence investment plan and highlighted Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s strong support for defence spending. However, he stressed that final decisions regarding the defence budget would be determined in upcoming Budgets and spending reviews. When pressed on whether the government would fund 3 percent of GDP for defence, he said he would “certainly not rule it out” but insisted that any commitment must be accompanied by clear explanations of how it would be financed, warning against repeating what he described as previous Conservative governments’ mistakes of making spending promises without credible fiscal backing.

The Defence Secretary also emphasized his responsibility to argue for increased military funding within the Cabinet but reiterated the challenges of committing to a specific figure without a corresponding funding strategy. He cautioned that public trust and fiscal credibility could suffer if spending ambitions are not matched by transparent financial plans.

The debate over the defence spending target reflects ongoing tension within Labour ranks regarding the party’s defence priorities and fiscal policy. While some senior figures emphasize the need to strengthen military capabilities in response to evolving global threats, others remain cautious about making fixed budgetary commitments without clear details on funding and economic consequences.