DistantNews
Support us

Infrastructure cuts to pay for defence will cost UK 10,000 jobs, analysis shows

From The Guardian · () English

Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources New plan
  • An analysis suggests that the UK's decision to cut infrastructure spending for defense will cost 10,000 jobs.
  • The government plans to invest an additional £15 billion in defense, but funding sources include unspecified cuts to other programs.
  • Critics argue that investing in public services like health and education creates more jobs than military spending.

The UK's significant increase in defense spending, amounting to an extra £15 billion, is projected to cost the country approximately 10,000 jobs, according to an analysis of government figures. Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the investment to modernize the armed forces and boost British manufacturing.

However, the funding for this defense plan raises concerns. While some funds are allocated from unspecified cuts to departmental investment programs, a substantial £4.7 billion remains unaccounted for. Researchers at the Transition Security Project found that while the defense investment might create around 10,000 jobs by 2029-30, the reallocation of funds from other sectors will result in a net loss of nearly double that number.

The idea that military spending can provide a defence dividend is misleading: job losses will result from this latest funding settlement while the opportunity cost of military spending is sharp.

— Khem RogalyCo-author of the Transition Security Project report, commenting on the economic impact of defense spending.

This analysis challenges claims by Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves that the spending shift will boost British jobs. Khem Rogaly, a co-author of the report, described the notion of a "defense dividend" as misleading. "Job losses will result from this latest funding settlement while the opportunity cost of military spending is sharp," Rogaly stated, adding that investments in public needs like health, education, and climate action create far more jobs.

This timely analysis highlights how making cuts to government departments to bankroll more military spending will result in job losses. This costly and wasteful plan means extra cash for war and overseas interventions, but less for schools and hospitals.

— Andrea EganGeneral secretary of Unison, a UK trade union, criticizing the defense spending plan.

Andrea Egan, general secretary of the Unison trade union, echoed these concerns, calling the plan "costly and wasteful." She argued that it prioritizes military spending for overseas interventions over essential services like schools and hospitals.

A government spokesperson defended the plan, calling defense an "engine for growth" that supports numerous jobs and apprenticeships. They asserted that the investment will back British workers, businesses, and innovation, ultimately creating nearly 60,000 new jobs and increasing defense exports. The spokesperson emphasized the need for increased defense readiness in a "new era of threat."

Defence is an engine for growth – supporting 272,000 jobs and over 25,000 MoD apprenticeships. The plan will back British workers, businesses and innovation, generate economic growth, create nearly 60,000 new jobs and increase defence exports.

— Government spokespersonDefending the government's defense investment plan and its economic benefits.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by The Guardian. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.