Future Capability of the Armed Forces

Baroness Eaton Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Eaton (Con)]

My Lords, I join with others in thanking my noble friend Lord Harlech for initiating this debate. This House meets to consider a question that goes to the very heart of our future national security. Just weeks ago, the Chief of the Defence Staff publicly stated that the United Kingdom is running out of time to boost its Armed Forces, and that our adversaries are definitely “raising the stakes” and risk “crossing a line”.

Let us be clear: this is not a distant, hypothetical threat; it is a present reality. Russia’s war against Ukraine has entered its fifth year; our critical infrastructure is being tested daily in cyber space and beneath our sea, and there is an assumption that the sustained decades of relative peace in Europe no longer hold. Meanwhile, the conflict in Iran has shown how trade routes can be easily disrupted and the prosperity of our nation threatened by the closure of vital international waterways that we might be required to help unplug. We must resist the temptation to treat defence policy as a matter of budgets and spreadsheets alone. To do so would be to diminish what is really at stake: the ability of this country to keep its people safe, honour its alliances and deter those who would do us harm.

This is a moment for not only ambition but candour, because the hard truth is that our war-fighting readiness has been degraded for years. It did not happen in a single Parliament and it will not be restored by a single spending review or investment plan. It is a structural problem and it demands a structural answer. The defence investment plan, which was published only recently, was meant to deliver the strategic defence review’s vision of a stronger Army, a hybrid Navy and a next-generation Air Force, yet even the Government’s own assessment points to a funding gap of billions of pounds in the years ahead, as decisions will need to be made about discretionary spending.

Even after the DIP, our defence spending will reach only 2.7% of GDP by 2027-28. This is a welcome commitment but, given that we have an objective to reach 3% in the next Parliament and 3.5% in “core defence” by 2035 to align with our NATO commitments—with no sense of where the money will come from—we are entitled to be concerned that our Armed Forces will be short-changed. Intentions and actual capabilities are not the same.

Of particular concern must be that the British Army now stands at its smallest size since the start of the Napoleonic Wars over two centuries ago. The Royal Navy is at its smallest size since the mid-17th century. We all understand and appreciate that the nature of warfare has changed and that size does not necessarily matter, but the ability to project power clearly still does. For all the technological advances promised in the DIP, mass will still count for something, and there are fears that here we are falling behind. We rightly welcome new investment in drones and autonomous systems, in the Dreadnought programme and in AUKUS. These are opportunities to modernise, to deter and to protect those who serve. Let us be honest, however: the scale of the challenge ahead means that we are beyond easy answers. Rebuilding warfighting readiness cannot happen overnight and requires a laser focus that has eluded us—by choice or by neglect—for generations.

Today, therefore, as we take note of the future capability of our Armed Forces in the current international situation, let us also use this debate as a moment of real scrutiny and ensure that we support whatever measures are required so that the men and women of our military have the capability, the equipment and the support they need to keep this country safe.

Ukraine

Baroness Eaton Excerpts

Friday 31st October 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Eaton (Con)]

My Lords, I join others in warmly welcoming the noble Lord, Lord Barrow, to the House and thank him so much for his inspirational maiden speech.

As we all know, it is now more than three years since Russia’s wicked invasion of Ukraine, which shattered the peace of Europe and the understanding on which our post-Cold War security rested. What began as an attempt to subjugate a foreign neighbour has called into question the positionality of an entire generation, as we in the West continue to falter in our resolve, resilience and the values we claim to cherish.

This time last year, this House spoke of the courage and endurance both of the Ukrainian people and of the western alliance supporting them. Since then, the world has changed drastically, with the return of President Trump, who has forced us to reconsider approaches we thought were axiomatic. Where NATO allies once spoke in unison, there is now always a sense of looking over one’s shoulder to see where Washington might have landed on an issue. Yet, amid the shifting language of diplomacy, one truth remains constant: Ukraine’s fight is our fight, for the purposes of sovereignty, freedom and the rule of law.

Noble Lords will remember that, in February, our International Relations and Defence Committee reflected soberly on what the war has revealed, concluding that Russia’s invasion marked the return of conventional warfare to Europe and, with that, the end of complacency. We have had to face the sombre reality that NATO’s defence posture has failed and that the United Kingdom and her allies alike are unprepared for war. Indeed, our defence industrial base, resources and endurance were all found lacking. Granted, the defence review began to address some of these weaknesses, but, if we want to be taken seriously on the world stage and protect our security from non-traditional threats, this is only the beginning. Our security cannot depend upon assumptions nor upon the good will of others. Instead, it must rest on readiness, risk mitigation and realism.

While the people of Ukraine continue to fight under relentless bombardment and humble us all with their courage, the least they can ask of the democratic nations of the world is not to falter in our championing of them. Be it through military supply, humanitarian relief or diplomatic advocacy, the voice of United Kingdom still carries. We must ensure that it continues to do so, not through rhetoric alone, but through consistent action. Tears in the fabric of the western alliance only embolden Moscow and signal to others, such as Beijing and Tehran, that the resolve of democracies is fallible.

It is undeniable that we have learned a great deal from Ukraine in terms of innovation and strategy in the last few years, but we must not forget to consider the moral arena too. Ukraine reminds us that freedom is never free, that deterrence must be actionable and that the financial burden of defence can never outweigh a national duty. As the world becomes ever more divided and relations that have existed for generations start to change, we see new powers coming to the fore, and the United Kingdom must remain centre stage. We stand by Ukraine not merely because it is right, but because our own peace depends upon its defence against the tyranny of oppression. Let us therefore recommit in word, in will and in deed to ensuring that Ukraine prevails, that aggression fails and that liberty endures.

Defence Spending: Scotland

Baroness Eaton Excerpts

Tuesday 29th April 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

Northern Ireland, as with the whole of the UK, including Scotland, will benefit from the increases in defence spending. Just one example of that is the huge new contract given to Thales in Belfast, which will generate a huge number of jobs. When you add not only direct employment at Thales but also the small and medium-sized businesses that will benefit from that, Northern Ireland will benefit from that increase in defence spending as well as other parts of the United Kingdom.

[Baroness Eaton (Con)]

My Lords, what role does the Minister see Scotland continuing to play in the UK’s ability to monitor and respond to threats in the North Atlantic and the Arctic region?

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

Scotland is crucial to the defence of the United Kingdom, but beyond that is the importance of the role that the bases in Scotland play in the defence of, for example, the Arctic and the Greenland Gap. One example of that is RAF Lossiemouth, which is a crucial RAF base for the Ministry of Defence and for the defence of our country. The aircraft based there, such as the Typhoons and the various intelligence aircraft that are there to gather information, are crucial to us. RAF Lossiemouth, along with other such facilities in Scotland, are crucial to the defence of our country.

Undersea Internet Cables

Baroness Eaton Excerpts

Thursday 16th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

To deal with the last part of the question first, I am pleased to see the Prime Minister in Kyiv pursuing what has been a cross-government—and across all parties in majority—defence of freedom and democracy in Ukraine and what that means for the rest of Europe and beyond. With respect to the other points that my noble friend made, he is right to draw attention to the increasing threats to critical underwater infrastructure. The military option is one option that we need to use. I say that because, as I have said at this Dispatch Box before in answer to, I believe, the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, and others, we must deter people from doing things in the first place. The use of maritime assets and underwater drones, the actions of the Joint Expeditionary Force and those of NATO are key to protecting these vital cable links on which much of our livelihoods, data, telecommunications, energy and so on depend. Military resource is one way in which we have to deal with that.

[Baroness Eaton (Con)]

My Lords, in light of recent concerns over security of undersea communication cables and the involvement of foreign state actors in potential sabotage, how do the Government plan to balance their intention to reset relations with China while addressing the risk posed by Chinese entities to our critical infrastructure?

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness for her question. The Government’s position with respect to China, as I have said on many occasions, is to co-operate, to compete and to challenge. Those are the three strands of the policy. The Ministry of Defence will challenge China, where appropriate or necessary, to ensure that the international rules-based order is protected, whether that is to do with critical underwater infrastructure or with other areas in the world where the rights of navigation and free passage are threatened. The Ministry of Defence is responsible for that, not alone but with our allies, and we will challenge China where necessary to ensure that the international rules-based order is protected.