The Treasury said that defence spending was already growing to meet the "ever changing threats" and that it was the fastest growing budget in Whitehall. "The UK maintains the biggest defence budget in Europe and the fifth largest in the world, already exceeding NATO's 2% spending target," a spokesperson said. "Over the next three years, the defence budget is increasing by £1bn a year."
This is the standard response to anyone querying the state of our armed forces. It's as if the government believes that spending 2% of GDP is an end - or an answer - in itself and not the capability which is or is not achieved. The fact that vast sums are wasted or that the achieved bang for the buck compared to, say, Israel or [name your preferred comparator] is appalling just doesn't register. That we have e.g. a handful of ships many of which are out of action and when the few serviceable vessels are actually deployed they are under-armed, doesn't seem to matter. There appears to be no acknowledgement that there should be an agreed minimum military capability appropriate to an increasingly unstable world and then funds made available to achieve that capability. There also appears to be no acknowledgement that a credible military both deters hostile adventurism and provides reassurance to allies and trading partners resulting in increased influence and trade opportunities.