Defence, Security and Resilience Bank Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury
Tuesday 19th May 2026

(3 weeks, 5 days ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Lord Fox Portrait Lord Fox
- Hansard - -

To ask His Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to joining the proposed defence, security and resilience bank.

Lord Livermore Portrait The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Livermore) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, while we are of course interested in working with NATO allies such as Canada, we have no current plans to join the defence, security and resilience bank. Our priority is to progress the proposed multilateral defence mechanism with a core group of EU and NATO allies and partners, including Denmark, Finland, Poland and the Netherlands. This mechanism will aim to aggregate demand, drive joint procurement, accelerate defence investment and increase the availability of critical capabilities such as munitions as we step up shared defence and security commitments.

Lord Fox Portrait Lord Fox (LD)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, as the Minister knows, financing rearmament is a challenge for all NATO countries, which is why I am a bit puzzled by the Government’s response. A viable defence, security and resilience bank would tick a number of important boxes: it would be multilateral; it would work with a greater number of allies; it would help project finance span election cycles; and it would cost-effectively pull in private finance. Yet last September the British Government ruled out joining the scheme, and this year when Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney made a direct request, the British Prime Minister gave only a lukewarm response. Why is it not in the interests of this country to pursue the creation of this scheme, which could go alongside all other schemes?