KEIR Starmer has been accused of following the “populist playbook” by cutting foreign aid in order to increase defence spending.
SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn criticised the Labour leader’s decision to cut the UK foreign aid budget by 40% by 2027 – from 0.5% of GDP to 0.3% – in order to fund a rise in defence spending from 2.3% to 2.5% of GDP in the same time period.
Speaking in Parliament, Flynn said: “Aside from a few of [Russian despot Vladimir] Putin's poodles who are not in their seats in this chamber here today, we are of course united in our support for the people of Ukraine and indeed in wishing the Prime Minister well in his discussions with the President of the United States later this week.
NEW: Stephen Flynn branded Reform UK as 'Putin's poodles' during PMQs today while condemning Labour for cutting foreign aid as a move from the 'populist playbook' pic.twitter.com/9JG0jiCWpa
— The National (@ScotNational) February 25, 2025
“But I'm afraid that's where the unity ends – because whilst we support increasing defence spending, we cannot support the populist playbook of cutting aid.
“Indeed, that's a position which was shared and agreed with by the Foreign Secretary just a matter of days ago, when he said that it would be a ‘big strategic mistake’ that would allow China to step in.
“Why was the Foreign Secretary wrong and the Prime Minister right?”
“We have spent years unravelling that strategic mistake,” Lammy added. “Development remains a very important soft power tool. And in the absence of development … I would be very worried that China and others step into that gap.”
In their General Election manifesto, Labour committed both to increasing defence spending to 2.5% of GDP and to “restoring development spending at the level of 0.7 per cent of gross national income as soon as fiscal circumstances allow”.
Reform UK’s manifesto said the party would increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 – the timeline the UK is now on – and also suggested cutting the foreign aid budget from 0.5% of GDP to 0.25%.
Cutting the foreign aid budget to boost defence was also proposed by Tory leader Kemi Badenoch over the weekend, though she did not suggest exact figures.
Responding to Flynn in the Commons, Starmer said that the decision to cut aid spending was not one he had wanted to take.
The Prime Minister said: “Well, let me thank [Flynn] for his support on the question of Ukraine, that is important.
“And just to reassure him, the decision that I've taken today on development aid is not an ideological decision. I absolutely understand the importance of it. It's a very difficult and painful decision, but a necessary decision.
“He talks about choice. They welcomed the biggest settlement since devolution in the Budget, but they voted against it because they couldn't take a choice.
“He welcomes the increase in defence spending, but he doesn't want to say how he will fund it.
“Choices, grown-up choices about the future of Europe require grown-up decisions and choices, and that is what we've done.”
On social media afterwards, Flynn suggested Labour had "chosen to box themselves in on tax" which prevented raising funds in other ways.
He added: "They could choose not to open the door to China in strategically important developing nations, instead they have chosen to follow the Musk and Trump playbook. Choices, all the wrong ones."
Nick Dearden, the director of Global Justice Now, said that Starmer could have raised the funding to increase defence spending in other ways than taking “from the mouths of the hungriest people in the world”.
Dearden said: "Starmer’s announcement today is politics at its most base. To appease [Donald] Trump, he will cut aid to its lowest level in a generation, forcing the poorest to pay so he can push taxpayer money into the coffers of arms corporations.
“There are numerous policies the government could take to avoid this – from a wealth tax on the super-rich to scrapping white elephants like Trident.
“It is a day of shame for Britain."
He went on: “There is a strong case for Europe taking more responsibility for its own security instead of continuing to cooperate with a far-right US government. But just like other areas of vital public services, that should be funded by fair taxation on the wealthy, not by sacrificing the lives of the poorest.
“This is a disgraceful decision, and it sends a very worrying signal about how easily Keir Starmer will roll over and what position he will take when Donald Trump puts pressure on his government.
“He should be standing up to this far right White House, not kowtowing to them and making some of the world’s most vulnerable people pay the price.”
