GCOMS UK Briefing points on the UK Autumn 2021 Budget and Spending Review

Our review of yesterday’s UK budget figures reveals that in this parliament the UK government will spend over seven times as much on the military as on reducing national carbon emissions. It also reveals the impact of the UK’s changing foreign policy priorities, with any ‘savings’ from the 30% cut in overseas aid more than swallowed up by increases in military spending.

UK government spending in key areas, 2021-25

This short briefing compares spending by the UK government – as announced in the Autumn Budget and Spending Review (ABSR)¹ – on the military, the Net Zero Strategy for reducing UK carbon emissions, and overseas aid.² All these areas are critical to the UK government’s Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy published in March³ – as well as to wider concerns about security, social justice and environmental sustainability.

• The budget confirms the major increase in UK military spending for the four financial years from 2021 to 2025. This increase was estimated at the time of the original announcement to be a total of £24.1bn across the period.⁴ Analysis by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI)⁵ concluded that it was the largest short-term increase in UK military spending since the Korean War, 70 years ago.
• The total core military spending for these four years is now planned to be £190.5bn.⁶ An annual breakdown is given in table 1. Note that this total does not include related spending of several billion pounds annually – which NATO also categorises as military spending – such as military pensions⁷. Hence the core figure gives an incomplete picture.
• The total planned spending by the government on the Net Zero Strategy (NZS) – aimed at reducing the UK’s carbon emissions – is £25.6bn over the same period.⁸ This is equivalent to less than 13% of the total military spending. The NZS was launched earlier this month,⁹ and a breakdown of spending by year and area is given in table 2.
• The total planned spending by the government on overseas aid – including international climate finance – is £45.5bn over the same period.¹⁰ This is equivalent to less than 24% of the total military spending. A breakdown of spending by year is given in table 3. The government has cut the aid budget over this period¹¹ from 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) to 0.5%, which we estimate amounts to a reduction of more than £18bn over the period.
• The announced increase in the military budget – £24bn – is comparable in scale to the £18bn decrease in the overseas aid budget. All of the increase is earmarked for capital spending.¹² In effect, overseas aid has been diverted for spending on UK weapons and other military equipment. The former includes funding for major poverty alleviation programmes, including vaccines – the absence of which could lead to 100,000 extra deaths.¹³ The latter includes a 44% increase in the nuclear weapons stockpile, which the UN has said is a breach of international law.¹⁴
• The Climate Change Committee (CCC) – a government advisory body – has pointed out several areas where the action specified in the NZS falls short.¹⁵ Other commentators have pointed out that other measures confirmed in the ABSR – such as the road-building programme and some reductions in air passenger duty – will actually lead to an increase carbon emissions.¹⁶ Some climate scientists have further argued that the CCC recommendations underestimate the scale of climate action necessary to reach the Paris targets.¹⁷
• As the UK hosts COP26 – the most important intergovernmental climate negotiations since the Paris Agreement – it is especially hard to understand why the government prioritises engaging in international arms races – in nuclear, cyber, robotic, AI, and space technologies – while funding for reducing UK carbon emissions and overseas aid is so compromised.¹⁸

This briefing note was prepared by Dr Stuart Parkinson, Co-chair of the UK branch of the Global Campaign on Military Spending and Executive Director of Scientists for Global Responsibility.

Table 1 – Planned UK govt spending of the Ministry of Defence, 2021-25

Table 2 – Planned UK govt spending on Net Zero Strategy (NZS), 2021-25

Note that most of the funding under ‘energy generation’ is earmarked for nuclear technologies which also are favoured by the military²⁰

Table 3 – Planned UK govt spending on overseas aid (official development assistance), 2021-25

Figure 1 – UK government spending in key areas, 2021-25

Notes: From totals of Tables 1, 2 & 3.

Figure 2 – Key changes in government spending, 2021-25

Notes: Decrease in overseas aid spending is the total difference over the 4 year period between 0.7% GNI and 0.5% GNI (from table 3)

1. HM Treasury (2021). Autumn budget and spending review 2021. 27 October. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/autumn-budget-and-spending-review-2021-documents
2. Overseas aid is also known as known as Official Development Assistance.
3. Cabinet Office (2021). Global Britain in a Competitive Age: the Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy. March. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/global-britain-in-a-competitive-age-the-integrated-review-of-security-defence-development-and-foreign-policy
4. PM’s Office (2020). PM statement to the House on the Integrated Review. 19 November. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-to-the-house-on-the-integrated-review-19-november-2020
5. RUSI (2021). A New Direction for the Ministry of Defence’s Budget? Implications of the November Spending Review. January. https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/policy-briefs/new-direction-ministry-defences-budget-implications-november-spending-review
6. This includes an average annual real terms growth rate of 1.5%. See data on p.40 of: HM Treasury (2021) – as note 1.
7. This problem is discussed in the Appendix of: Campaign Against Arms Trade (2020). Fighting the wrong battles. https://caat.org.uk/resources/fighting-the-wrong-battles/
8. This total does not include spending on flood defences – classified as climate adaptation – or international climate finance – which is part of overseas aid. See data on p.73 of: HM Treasury (2021) – as note 1.
9. Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (2021). Net Zero Strategy: Build Back Greener. 19 October. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/net-zero-strategy
10. See data on p.105 of: HM Treasury (2021) – as note 1.
11. The ABSR leaves open the possibility that the aid budget in the final year of this period could be reinstated to the 0.7% level if the state of public finances is considered robust enough at that time (p.79 of: HM Treasury, 2021).
12. RUSI (2021) – as note 5.
13. Mitchell I, Hughes S, Ritchie E (2021). An Overview of the Impact of Proposed Cuts to UK Aid. Centre for Global Development. 25 January. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/overview-impact-proposed-cuts-uk-aid
14. For details and further analysis of the increases in weapons spending – including that on nuclear arms – see: Parkinson S (2021). Brexit Britain’s security policy: cutting aid to spend on weapons. Responsible Science, no.3. https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/brexit-britain-s-security-policy-cutting-aid-spend-weapons
15. CCC (2021). Independent Assessment: The UK’s Net Zero Strategy. https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/independent-assessment-the-uks-net-zero-strategy/
16. The Guardian (2021). ‘Cop26 own goal’: despair over budget backing for flights and roads. 27 October. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/oct/27/cop26-own-goal-despair-over-budget-backing-for-flights-and-roads
17. Simms A (2020). Turning delusion into climate action – Prof Kevin Anderson, an interview. Responsible Science, no.2. https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/turning-delusion-climate-action-prof-kevin-anderson-interview Also see: SGR (2020). Why do we need the climate oath? https://www.sgr.org.uk/projects/why-do-we-need-climate-oath
18. For further analysis, see: Parkinson S (2021) – as note 14.
19. Carbon capture, Utilisation and Storage
20. See, for example: Johnstone P, Stirling A (2021). Hidden military implications of ‘building back’ with new nuclear in the UK. Responsible Science, no.3. https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/hidden-military-implications-building-back-new-nuclear-uk