LIVERPOOL, England — Under U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the Labour government has made a big play of pouring money into the defense sector — and is changing the party, as well as the country, in the process.
Labour’s change of heart when it comes to world affairs can be felt as members gather in Liverpool for its annual party conference, once the natural home of progressive internationalism and a fierce commitment to foreign aid.
NGOs once flocked to Labour conference, holding rows and rows of stalls in the exhibition hall and attracting the great and the good to their fringe events. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown spoke loftily of Britain as a development superpower, and embraced the Make Poverty History campaign as well as the movement to enshrine foreign aid spending in law.
This year, the presence of NGOs has noticeably diminished, with fewer events focused on international development and many charities deciding not to bother coming to conference at all.
In their place are defense companies and lobbyists, buoyed by Starmer’s commitment to ratchet up spending on the sector to 5 percent of gross domestic product by 2035 and his pledge to make the country “battle-ready.”
On one level, the vibe shift reflects the reality of forces felt across the world, as Western countries adjust to war in Europe and a less beneficent United States.
But it also marks a sea change inside Britain’s biggest center-left party, and one that is already shaping the way it governs.
The new consensus
As delegates arrive in Liverpool hoping to influence the Starmer government, some are feeling less optimistic than others.
Paul Abernethy of Bond, a network for organizations working in international development, said: “I’ve noticed a lot of our members choosing not to attend conference, or at least if they are attending, they’re certainly cutting down the amount of resources behind it.”
The costs are “astronomical,” he added, and “I’m not surprised [fewer NGOs are attending] when political parties like Labour and the Conservatives are de-prioritizing international development and foreign policy.”
The reason for their gloom is self-evident, as conference meets for the first time since Starmer announced he would slash spending on aid from 0.5 percent to 0.3 percent of GDP in order to boost defense coffers. Those cuts fall not just on the recipients of development grants but also on the charities dedicated to supporting them.
At a fringe event on aid cuts, Flora Alexander, executive director of International Rescue Committee UK, said: “Our [Britain’s] standing and our influence has been affected — it’s what happens when you say you’ll commit a certain amount of money and then you don’t.”
The picture is especially stark when placed alongside the mood in the Labour Party of 10 or 20 years ago.
Kevin Watkins, a professor of development practice at the London School of Economics and former CEO of Save the Children, said under former leaders Tony Blair and Gordon Brown “you had big hitters who were really leading on multilateralism and internationalism.”
The aid movement of the early 2000s also gained currency as a supposed means of damping down terrorist radicalization and strengthening national security.
However, as Watkins observed, its place in mainstream politics has now given way to a new “consensus” among Labour, the Conservatives and Reform UK that “the U.K. should be stepping back from global leadership on poverty reduction.”
Defense on the march
The contrast with the mood among defense suppliers — who have at times been regarded with suspicion in Labour circles — could hardly be more marked.
Andrew Kinniburgh, director general of manufacturers’ body Make UK, said: “Certainly the message we get [from the government] is that defense is really at the heart of what they’re doing, and it’s probably at the front of the queue in terms of leading growth.”
A representative of an aerospace company, granted anonymity to speak freely, described the cognitive dissonance experienced by some in the industry.
“Did I think Labour would invest in defense? Yes. Did I ever think one of our biggest export cheerleaders would be David Lammy? No.”
Lammy, until recently the foreign secretary, is drawn from the “soft left” of the party, which is traditionally less hawkish and more skeptical of the arms industry — but defense is having a moment, as Labour’s quest for jobs and growth coincides with heightened external threats, particularly from Russia.
Paul Mason, an economist and a fellow at the Council on Geostrategy, said at a fringe event “the whole party should be united” behind the defense agenda, as it would deliver high-skilled jobs as well as helping to repel Nigel Farage’s Reform.
Defense Minister Luke Pollard told POLITICO: “This isn’t something that is far, far away — there are hundreds of thousands of people whose jobs rely on defense today … That’s something that I hope the entire country will be able to get behind.”
A lasting change?
Senior Labour figures insist the trade-off between investment in defense and progressive causes is not zero-sum.
Development Minister Jenny Chapman, speaking at a fringe event, said she was “optimistic” about the U.K. continuing to make a difference on the world stage despite the cuts to her budget.
Yet it is hard to find anyone who believes that the golden era of overseas development could make a comeback and dominate mainstream politics in the way it once did.
Instead, Labour insiders in Liverpool are unapologetic about their reinvention as the party of defense — once much more closely associated with the Conservatives — and want it to stay that way.
“It’s been a long road,” said one Labour adviser, “to convince people we’re as strong on defense as we are on other international issues. We need to guard that now.”
The post Defense companies feel the love at Labour conference appeared first on Politico.
