Reeves accused of unforgivable profligacy (Image: Jeff Overs/BBC/PA Wire)
Massive spikes in Britain’s national debt under Rachel Reeves could have funded the boost Britain’s defences desperately need, the Conservatives have claimed.
New analysis by the Conservative party shows the surge in borrowing costs on the Chancellor’s watch is nearly the same as the amount Britain needs to meet its NATO commitments.
Get exclusive defence news and analysis from our experts and more Invalid email
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
Shadow Chancellor Sir Mel Stride MP tore into Ms Reeves, who is widely expected to be out of the job within weeks, accusing her of “unforgivable profligacy”.
He said: “The legacy of Rachel Reeves as Chancellor is one of unforgivable profligacy. Debt interest is continuing to soar on her watch, thanks to reckless borrowing and high inflation.”
The Tory money man said every pound wasted servicing Britain’s ballooning borrowing was money that “could have gone to other priorities, such as the urgent need to boost defence spending where Labour have utterly failed to meet their commitments.”
Conservatives say the annual debt interest bill will be some £24billion bigger by the end of this Parliament than it was before Ms Reeves delivered her first tax-hiking Budget.
Sir Mel also took aim at the state of the public finances, warning: “The bond markets are charging us more to borrow than any other G7 country – in fact, more than countries like Greece and Morocco.”
Speaking to the BBC he added Ms Reeves had borrowed “about a quarter of a trillion pounds […] across the Parliament”, leaving behind a “low growth economy that is very fragile”.
The onslaught came as the Chancellor defended her record, claiming Britain was better off now than when she started.
Stride: Debt interest soaring on Reeves’s watch (Image: Jonathan Buckmaster)
But the Tories claim she has done “untold damage” to firms during her time in No11, accusing her of piling on taxes and strangling growth.
Ms Reeves, however, mounted a robust defence of her record. She insisted she had “delivered quite radical change” and had restored “credibility to the economy, and to Labour’s economic policy”.
The Chancellor said the next Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, would “take over an economy that is much stronger than the one I inherited from the Conservatives”.
She also insisted pensioners were “better off after two years of this Labour government”, despite her Budget having dragged many pensioners into tax for the first time.
But Sir Mel warned little would change under a Burnham-led Labour Party, saying Mr Burnham “clearly is going to lean more into tax, more into borrowing”.
Conservatives Warn Debt Surge Could Undermine Britain’s Defence Ambitions
The political row over Britain’s finances intensified as Conservative MPs continued their attack on Rachel Reeves’ economic record, arguing that the rise in borrowing and debt interest payments has left the country with less room to strengthen its armed forces at a time of growing international instability.
Tory figures claimed that the additional billions being spent on servicing government debt could have been redirected towards defence investment, including improving military equipment, increasing troop numbers and rebuilding Britain’s defence manufacturing base.
The Conservatives argued that the Government’s financial decisions had created a difficult situation where ministers were being forced to choose between meeting public spending commitments and responding to rising security challenges around the world.
With conflicts continuing in Europe and tensions increasing in other regions, defence has become a major political issue. NATO allies have been under pressure to increase military spending, and Britain has repeatedly pledged to strengthen its armed forces while maintaining its position as one of the leading defence powers in Europe.
Sir Mel Stride said the Government had failed to create the economic conditions needed to support those commitments.
He said: “A strong economy is the foundation of a strong defence policy. If the Government allows borrowing costs to spiral, then every additional pound spent on debt interest is a pound that cannot be invested in protecting the country, supporting families or growing the economy.”
The Conservatives also pointed to concerns from financial markets, arguing that higher borrowing costs reflected a lack of confidence in Labour’s economic approach.
They claimed that businesses had been hit by uncertainty following tax rises and increased regulation, warning that weaker economic growth would ultimately reduce the money available for public services and national security.
However, Labour rejected the accusations, insisting that the Government inherited difficult economic circumstances and had taken necessary decisions to stabilise the public finances.
Supporters of Ms Reeves argued that increased spending on infrastructure, public services and long-term investment would help strengthen the economy over time. They said previous Conservative governments had left behind high levels of debt and pressure on public finances.
A Labour source said the Government’s priority was creating sustainable growth rather than making unfunded commitments that could damage economic stability.
They argued that defence spending depended not only on the size of government budgets but also on building a stronger industrial base, creating jobs and improving productivity.
The dispute reflects a wider battle over Britain’s economic future, with Conservatives accusing Labour of excessive spending while Labour argues that investment is necessary to repair years of underinvestment.
The debate has become even more significant as Britain faces increasing pressure to expand its defence capabilities. Military leaders have warned that threats facing the country are becoming more complex, requiring greater investment in technology, intelligence, cyber defence and conventional forces.
Former defence officials have repeatedly highlighted concerns about equipment shortages, recruitment challenges and the need to modernise the armed forces.
The Government has promised to increase defence spending over time, but critics argue that delays and uncertainty could weaken Britain’s ability to respond quickly to emerging threats.
The Conservatives believe that reducing waste and controlling borrowing should be at the centre of economic policy, allowing more resources to be directed towards national security.
Labour insists that economic stability must come first, arguing that responsible financial management will create the foundations for future defence investment.
The clash between the two parties is expected to continue as the Government faces pressure over taxation, borrowing and spending decisions. With public finances under scrutiny and global security concerns rising, defence is likely to remain one of the most important political issues in Westminster.
As Britain prepares for future security challenges, the central question remains whether the Government can balance economic pressures with the need to maintain a powerful and well-equipped military. For voters, the debate is not only about numbers on a balance sheet but also about the country’s ability to protect itself in an increasingly uncertain world.