At lunchtime on Thursday, a Labour source sent a video message to Laura Kuenssberg: a gif of a shadowy hand flicking over one domino, which knocked over another, then another, then hundreds, then thousands came tumbling down. Half an hour after the shock resignation of John Healey, the defence secretary, the source was suggesting a chain of events that could bring down Sir Keir Starmer.
Healey’s exit was a disaster for Downing Street. One cabinet minister told Kuenssberg everyone would be “shaken”. Another insider joked grimly: “It’s been a really hard week – stronger words could be used.” For the defence secretary to say publicly that the prime minister’s decisions were putting the country at risk is about as bad as it gets, Kuenssberg wrote.
“John Healey and Al Carns resigned over inadequate defence spending, leaving Keir Starmer's leadership in crisis.”
Within hours, the armed forces minister, Al Carns, also resigned. Carns, a former Royal Marine tipped as a potential successor to Starmer, said the Defence Investment Plan (DIP) “is not built for the threat we face” and that “it has become clear to me that the change I had pushed for is not going to come”. He wrote: “A serious country funds its defence to meet the threat it actually faces, not the threat it wishes it faced.” In an apparent call for a change of leader, he added: “We need a new way of governing and we need it now.”
Healey’s resignation letter was quietly devastating. He blamed Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves, saying the prime minister had been “unable” and the Treasury “unwilling” to commit resources. He said the DIP financial settlement, finalised on Monday, “falls way short of what is required” and that he was being forced to make decisions that “would reduce the readiness of our forces and increase the risk to personnel on operations, and could make our country less safe.” He had demanded a target of 3% of GDP on defence by 2030, but was refused.
One former Labour cabinet minister said the crisis illustrated that “Keir has never got control of the Treasury, even though he’s meant to be in charge”. A source told Kuenssberg: “The deal was so bad they didn’t know how to present it.” As late as Wednesday night, Downing Street was still debating whether to announce an extra £15bn, £13.5bn or £10bn for defence.
Dan Jarvis, the security minister and a former British Army officer, was appointed to replace Healey. At least one parliamentary private secretary at the MoD, Pam Nash, also resigned. The resignations weaken Starmer, who has faced questions over his leadership after poor local election results. Andy Burnham is widely expected to challenge for the leadership if he wins the by-election in Makerfield. Carns, in his first interview after quitting, said the military could be tested “in the next two to three years” and that the DIP “lacked innovation, lessons learnt from Ukraine… a thinking of the bureaucracy and a refinement of procurement processes”. He called for “bold and courageous decisions” on funding, adding: “There is an argument around welfare.”
Healey’s departure has blown a giant hole in the argument used by Starmer loyalists that the prime minister must stay for his record on security and managing foreign allies. As one insider said: “What does Andy know about defence? Can you imagine Wes handling Trump?” Those retorts now ring hollow.