The May 2026 local elections weren’t just a bad night for Labour, they confirmed a broader shift: Britain’s political duopoly is shattered. In a multi‑party Britain, defence will not sit in a silo, especially as geopolitical tensions spanning Russia, Taiwan and the Middle East show no signs of abating.

The delayed signal

The Defence Investment Plan (DIP) was due months ago. It still isn’t here. Defence Secretary, John Healey, has been doing his best to keep industry hanging on amidst rumours of spending increases from the Starmer administration. At the same time, the public evidently needs further convincing of the need, among so many competing economic priorities, despite the clear and present global threats that exist.

Parliamentarians have warned delays over defence commitments have risked sending “damaging signals to adversaries”. Industry has been even blunter: “paralysis”, “bleeding cash”, and smaller firms going to the wall while they wait for a predictable 10‑year demand signal.

This isn’t just about uncertainty over a Whitehall document. It is the difference between a supply chain that scales, and one that quietly atrophies.

Defence is now a whole‑system question, with national security, industrialisation, research and development, technological advancement, and jobs and skills all unquestionably symbiotic. Equally, the answers do not only lie with the traditional primes, but with the tech disruptors, the research institutions, and the professional services companies driving progress.

Labour: the gloves are off

Even before the local elections, pitch-rolling from potential runners and riders for Starmer’s crown had begun on defence. The real dividing line is no longer around more / less spending, it’s about what you cut, tax, or reform to pay for it.

Wes Streeting has signalled that extra funding, “has got to come from somewhere.” Andy Burnham suggests treating defence investment as exceptional, but markets have reacted sharply to the potential leadership turbulence, with yields hitting financial-crisis level peaks. In other words: defence may be urgent, but credibility still has to be earned. Then, of course, there’s Al Carns, currently a junior minister in the Ministry of Defence. For some Labour voters, he may be the answer to fighting the Reform vote in their heartlands. A decorated war hero rapidly gaining Westminster experience, he would undoubtedly have the most direct take.

Reform: urgency, scale — and a different funding story

Reform UK pushes a simpler message on defence: go faster and further. Its 2024 “Contract” committed to 3% spending of GDP within six years, recruitment expansion, pay reviews, procurement reform, and an Armed Forces Justice Bill. Farage has also tied this to scrapping net zero policy and deep cuts to overseas aid. It’s a blunt approach that will resonate with many.

The Greens: different security theory — still a stakeholder

In a multi‑party system, you don’t get to choose which voices matter. The Greens are rising — and their security worldview differs sharply: ending Trident, prioritising diplomacy and aid, and scepticism towards NATO’s current form. For those operating in the defence and security sector, the response shouldn’t be to shrug. The key becomes translating your message in terms of resilience, cyber, tech innovation, deterrence and preparedness, in terms that land with Green‑leaning voters.

The bottom line

The UK’s defence deal — money, priorities, and procurement speed — is being shaped now, across Labour factions, Reform, and the remaining parties. Yes, that includes the Tories, who may be slipping below the radar now, but traditionally they’ve arguably been the strongest of the parties on national security.

Beyond party politics, though, it’s clear now how defence cuts right across Government. Talking to HM Treasury becomes just as important as those conversations within the Ministry of Defence, and then you get into the growing influence of the regions and the Metro Mayors around delivery of economic growth.

Organisations with real solutions shouldn’t wait for the DIP to tell their story. They should already be driving the conversation with certainty. The consensus is that this Prime Minister came to power lacking credible policy solutions. His successor, and whoever follows them, will be desperate to embrace real innovation and ideas that cut through now.

Photo by Lawrence Krowdeed on Unsplash