This is John Batchel, colleague Joseph Sternberg, observing how the ambition for Kirstarmer,

the prime minister and his chancellor of the exchequer, Rachel Reeves, is to match the NATO

request for 3.5% spending on defense. However, there is the overwhelming number of labor votes that, well, as Joe describes

them, they are not going to sacrifice the safety net for defense. Here Joe Sternberg explains

the quandary the prime ministers wandered into with an overwhelming majority,

the backbench of which any moment could revolt.

More of this tonight.

I suspect the Starmer and elements of the leadership of the Labor Party probably would be prepared to go up to 3.5% of GDP on defense spending at some point. But they're

constrained. They're going to have to go very slowly, partly because the money isn't there.

But they're also constrained by the fact that their party does have a left-leaning wing that

doesn't think that defense spending is important, and that also definitely is not prepared to sacrifice

other forms of social spending in order to free up money for defense.

And you're already seeing this in the bruising debate that is happening where they wanted

to reform the disability benefit system, the equivalent of the Social Security disability benefit in the U.S., there

was an attempt to reform that, to tighten the eligibility a little bit, push more people into

work who can work, and reduce the expense of that welfare benefit. And that debate is starting

to run off the rails here because the Labor Party doesn't want to go

along with it. And I don't see how you can get to 3.5% GDP spending on defense if you're governed by a

party that is absolutely unwilling to contemplate any kind of welfare reform.