The Treasury said no in the end.

The Treasury still often sees defence as a drain on public spending and not the driver of economic growth that we've demonstrated in two years.

It's important to Nato, it's important to Britain that we...demonstrate the sort of leadership that's required from within the European Nato as the US starts to scale back its contribution.

The Treasury's a paradox: you have some of the very best and brightest officials in the Treasury, but you have, too often, a Treasury orthodoxy that's a dead hand on dynamic government.

By 2030, well over half of Nato members will be spending 3% or more. And when allies are looking for British leadership, we must not fall behind.

Sir Keir Starmer is unable and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats

I appreciate how hard this is for cabinet colleagues and I am very grateful to those who support what is required, but not all needs to be done by cutbacks elsewhere

the UK’s defence spending plan falls well short of what is required

Our defence spending plan falls well short of what is required.

There is no date for reaching 3 per cent spending on defence, and our adversaries do not follow timetables set by the Treasury.

This is not the moment for calibration or incremental change. This means bigger politics, bolder priorities and harder choices.

Our adversaries do not follow timetables set by the Treasury.