‘Why Labour’s new Defence Industrial Strategy can be a vote winner’

Last month, with barely a whisper of media coverage, the government unveiled what could turn out to be one of the most consequential policy shifts of its time in office: a new Defence Industrial Strategy.

At over 100 pages, it’s both a major rethink of how Britain approaches national security and defence spending, and a brutal analysis of what has previously gone wrong.

But this isn’t simply about buying more tanks and  warships — it’s a bold attempt to rewire the UK’s economic engine by placing growth, innovation and sovereignty at the heart of our defence policy.

The core idea is strikingly simple: build more at home. That means prioritising British companies for defence contracts, investing in homegrown science and technology, and working with universities, trade unions and employers to create a pipeline of highly skilled jobs.

As Defence Secretary John Healey put it, the goal is to “make defence an engine for growth”. Perhaps the most quietly radical element is the proposed introduction of an offset policy in defence procurement.

‘The answer is political’

When the UK has to buy its military kit from overseas, foreign suppliers will be required to deliver direct economic benefits to the UK — whether through investment, training, or subcontracting to British firms. Frankly, it’s hard to believe this wasn’t already the case.

And it raises an obvious question: why hasn’t this been front-page news? The answer is political. Despite the media focusing on the electoral threat from Reform on the right, Labour is also feeling pressure from the left.

With the Greens polling at 12% and Your Party — before its implosion — briefly attracting hundreds of thousands of supporters, any move to spend more on weapons while welfare budgets remain tight is a hard sell to progressive voters.

READ MORE: ‘Labour needs to make digital ID boring if it’s to be a successful policy – here’s how’

Repealing the two-child benefit cap remains unfunded; rearming the military does not. That tension is politically awkward, even if the policy is economically sound.

Nonetheless, these are exactly the kind of long-term, pragmatic policies  that the government should be championing.

It’s a policy that could drive sustainable growth, deliver high-skilled, high-wage jobs, and strengthen Britain’s ability to defend itself in a rapidly deteriorating global security environment. If done right, it won’t just make us safer—it could also make us richer.

More fundamentally, it could also help answer a question many in Westminster are still asking: what does this government actually stand for?

‘An opportunity for the government to frame its whole agenda’

Fifteen months in, Keir Starmer’s administration still struggles to articulate a clear strategy. By not being able to outline a clear direction of travel, the government has become reactive, not proactive, allowing itself to be buffeted by events.

Many voters—and even many MPs and Ministers-would struggle to summarise the government’s agenda in a single sentence.

This policy offers a template for what they want to achieve in office, by focusing on growth, science and security. These are not just buzzwords; they are mutually reinforcing priorities.

Investing in science boosts economic competitiveness and national resilience. Spending on defence, if done intelligently, can strengthen domestic industry. A secure country is a precondition for prosperity.

READ MORE: ‘Labour’s Budget must include long-term plan for pay restoration’

The government must also be clear with the public about the new geopolitical reality the UK faces. The world has changed, and the threats are real.

Russian drones and jets are probing European air defences, while in space their satellites are routinely trying to jam our own. This week the National Cyber Security Centre has declared that “highly significant” cyberattacks have increased 50% in the last year, and are now occurring every other day.

At the same time, America, historically our closest ally, is pulling back from Europe and may not be willing to come to our defence. If we want to be secure, we need to do it ourselves.

A 21st-century industrial strategy must respond to a 21st-century security landscape. This Defence Industrial Strategy isn’t just a procurement policy — it’s an opportunity for the government to frame its whole agenda. Now they need to own it.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook.

Share your thoughts. Contribute on this story or tell your own by writing to our Editor. The best letters every week will be published on the site. Find out how to get your letter published.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected].
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • DONATE: If you value our work, please chip in a few pounds a week and become one of our supporters, helping sustain and expand our coverage.
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].