Jacob Rees-Mogg Criticizes UK Defence Spending

Rees-Mogg suggested that Burnham's prioritization of social security over national security could similarly haunt him.

He quoted Burnham's statement: "Yes, we do everything to support our national security, but it can't come at the expense of social security," adding that strong national security also relies on community resilience.

Rees-Mogg refuted the notion that the UK is forced to choose between social and national security.

He argued that even a small cut in welfare spending could fund the full NATO defense contribution, a step not currently taken.

This discussion coincided with the expected results of the Russian election, which saw most votes for Vladimir Putin, with reports of pre-filled ballot slips.

Rees-Mogg noted that Vladimir Putin's mandate from the recent election could further escalate the war against Ukraine.

He emphasized that Russia and its allies view this as a direct threat to the United Kingdom, citing warnings from Richard Horn, Chief Executive of the National Cyber Security Center, about the most seismic geopolitical shift in modern history.

MI6 Chief Bla1 Metrai's December statement reinforced this, describing the world as more dangerous and contested than it has been for decades, with operations occurring in a space between peace and war, especially in cyberspace where cyberattacks against UK allies have been observed.

Rees-Mogg highlighted Russian news presenters, such as Vladimir Solivy, who have openly discussed using nuclear weapons against the United Kingdom.

He criticized the UK's lack of action, noting that the government's response is to do nothing and to avoid cutting the social security budget.

He also pointed out that a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, who resigned as Defence Secretary due to insufficient defence expenditure, had not increased defence spending upon returning to a new position, despite earlier calls for it.

He described this approach as a pitiful form of governance, where risks are escalating while solutions diminish.

Rees-Mogg warned that Andy Burnham would be historically blamed if he did not address these issues.

PIA aims to hide IP addresses and keep data private, addressing concerns about data sharing with businesses, shops, and social media giants.

The sponsor emphasized that over 30 million people have downloaded PIA to protect their online presence.

Private Internet Access (PIA) encrypts internet connections to safeguard personal data from cybercriminals.

Beyond hackers, PIA also addresses concerns about information censorship.

The example of Canada's C18 bill, which led social media giants to ban news content, was cited, with PIA offering a solution to consume news and content without restriction, available across multiple operating systems with one subscription.

The promotion included an 83% discount, reducing the cost to under two dollars a month, comparable to the price of a coffee, plus an additional four months free.

A 30-day money-back guarantee was also offered, urging viewers to visit piavpn.com/gbnews for digital protection.

Julian Lewis, former Defence Minister, expressed deep concern over the current geopolitical situation.

He acknowledged that while it is not precisely 1938, there is a major war in Europe where Vladimir Putin is attempting to extinguish a democracy of 40 million people.

Lewis also highlighted Russia's extensive range of activities below the threshold of open warfare.

Julian Lewis noted the UK's need to borrow submarines from the Americans and the French to protect underwater cables, as its own submarines are not operational.

He attributed this to a failure by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) to maintain its equipment properly and to allocate sufficient funds.

Lewis identified this issue as a combination of underfunding and incompetence in defense management.

The country has no clear path to reaching 3% of GDP for defense, let alone the 3.5% target for 2035.

He attributed this not only to insufficient funds but also to a long-standing incompetence in defense management since Tony Blair's government sold off much of the MOD's in-house scientific capability, leading to a loss of proper procurement project management.

Julian Lewis criticized the Ministry of Defence's (MOD) inability to properly manage defense procurement projects, citing frequent examples.

He noted that even within a small and inadequate defense budget, money is often not spent effectively, leading to real problems as funds are misdirected.

Defense companies report delayed orders and instructions, while investigative programs are not taking place and training exercises are being cut, leaving the forces vulnerable.

Julian Lewis drew a parallel to 1932, when commitments were refused, leading to panic in 1935-36 as rearmament began, cautioning that the UK may not have four years now.

He expressed disbelief at the cancellation of routine army training.

Lewis highlighted an unprecedented exodus of middle-ranking officers from the armed forces.

Soldiers, who had been preparing all year for annual exercises, now find them cancelled, leaving them in barracks.

Despite this, the amount of paperwork for the armed forces continues to increase, exacerbating the frustration.

While chiefs of staff are striving to modernize the armed forces based on lessons from Ukraine, traditional major defense industrial companies, driven by their own interests, continue to push for the procurement of large, older equipment rather than focusing on newer technologies.

Julian Lewis criticized traditional major defense industrial companies for advocating for more of the same equipment, driven by their interests in selling large pieces of equipment they already produce.

This approach diverts focus from newer technologies that are constantly evolving.

He highlighted a key lesson from the war in Ukraine: the rapid development of drones in weeks and the need for quick changes in production techniques, contrasting with the MOD's procurement process that takes years to decades.

Julian Lewis attributed Ukraine's ability to hold on so effectively to their extraordinary gallantry and rapid adaptation.

Unlike the UK, Ukraine's defense suppliers are distributed across a large number of mostly smaller firms.

These firms have personnel working directly with soldiers on the front lines, sharing risks and quickly identifying what works and what doesn't.