Slashing transport spending to fund a significant increase in the UK defence budget would be a mistake that failed to recognise the strategic role infrastructure plays in times of conflict, Logistics UK warned.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer is planning on making cuts across the government in a bid to fund his overdue Defence Investment Plan.
The plan was expected to be published last year but now may not come out until July amid reported disagreements within the government over how to pay for it.
The UK has committed to reaching a target of spending 2.5% on core defence by April 2027 and has ambitions of reaching 3% in the next Parliament – although this could be pulled forward to the current Parliament.
However, Logistics UK said both defence and transport infrastructure were fundamental to the country’s security and economic strength and cutting one budget to bankroll the other was based on a mistake that allocation decisions were a simple choice between the two.
“Efficient logistics depends on reliable transport networks, enabling goods to move quickly and reliably across the country and through our international gateways,” said Ben Fletcher, Logistics UK CE.
“The transport networks that underpin businesses, communities and public services, are the same networks that are critical for the defence industries to be able to increase production, and the country will need for moving resources during any future mobilisation.
“It is vital that the UK invests in defence to enhance its ability to respond to an increasingly uncertain world.
“As government finalises its spending plans, we urge it to remain committed to infrastructure investment and to the findings of the 2025 Strategic Defence Review, which rightly highlights the importance of building national resilience in partnership with industry.”
In January, the head of the armed forces, Sir Richard Knighton, told MPs the UK military lacked the funding and mass to deter or fight a full-scale conflict.
He told the defence committee: “Over the last 30 years, since the end of the cold war, we have taken a peace dividend and we are not as ready as we need to be for the kind of full-scale conflict that we might face.”
