Committee publication · Correspondence · 3 March 2026

Letter dated 3rd March from the Chair to Secretary of State regarding the Strategic Defence Review and Defence Investment Plan

From: Defence Committee

Summary

Chair Tan Dhesi writes to Defence Secretary John Healey seeking clarification on the Strategic Defence Review's scope and the planned Defence Investment Plan. The letter challenges why the SDR did not explicitly recommend disinvestment or role deletion, questions decision-making timelines, and asks for details on fiscal envelopes and Afghan resettlement costs affecting defence budgets.

Key findings

  • SDR terms of reference asked for 'reprioritisation' and 'new investment' but the Chief of Defence Staff stated the SDR did not specify areas for disinvestment, only improvement and modernisation.
  • Government stated disinvestment decisions remain with the Department, not the SDR Reviewers, raising questions about whether the external review's scope was deliberately limited.
  • Committee seeks clarification on when the Defence Investment Plan replaced the Defence Equipment Plan and whether SDR Reviewers were given fiscal envelopes accounting for Afghan resettlement costs.
  • Committee questions whether the Department intends to publish the Defence Investment Plan only when fully agreed, departing from annual adjustment practice under the previous Defence Equipment Plan.
  • Letter highlights apparent contradiction between initial SDR framing (root-and-branch review of capabilities) and actual execution (improvement-focused with no explicit capability deletion recommendations).

Tone

Procedural

Topics

defence-policydefence-spendingstrategic-reviewcapability-planningpublic-finance

Key actors

Tan Dhesi MP, John Healey MP, Chief of Defence Staff, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, Ministry of Defence

Notable line

"disinvestment decisions as well as investment decisions …

Key Quotes

… although the SDR, as we have both agreed, did lay out priorities for improvement and modernisation, and for filling in hollowness that it reflected on, it did not give us specific areas in which we should disinvest or seek to slow down investment
Chief of Defence Staff (quoted in earlier testimony) · explaining SDR's actual output versus initial scope
"disinvestment decisions as well as investment decisions …
Secretary of State for Defence (quoted in earlier testimony) · clarifying where capability deletion decisions sit
The SDR does not appear to recommend what the Armed Forces should no longer do, with no clear suggestion of what roles, capabilities …
Tan Dhesi MP · summarising the committee's concern about the review's scope
View original document →

Source · parliament.uk record ↗