Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said he will not increase defense spending by cutting social security benefits, responding to Conservative proposals to fund military budgets by reducing welfare support. Burnham was asked about his commitment to reach 3% of the UK’s GDP for defense spending by 2030, a goal set in the government’s spending review. He warned that cutting £4 billion from housing benefits would lead to widespread homelessness, including many children living in temporary shelters. Burnham emphasized that national security and social security are both essential, arguing that strong communities are the foundation of a secure nation. He also stated that the government will meet NATO’s target of spending 3.5% of GDP on defense by 2035, with an intermediate goal of 3% set for the next year. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch criticized Burnham, calling it “unbelievable” that the prime minister would not support funding defense through welfare cuts. She accused the government of prioritizing other spending, such as transferring sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, over investing in military forces. Badenoch pointed out that real-term defense spending had fallen in the previous year and questioned why the government would choose to send money overseas instead of training more troops. Burnham responded by noting that the previous Labour government left defense spending at 2.5% of GDP, and when Badenoch’s government left office, it had dropped to 2.3%. He stated that defense spending is now set to rise to 2.7% in the next year and urged all members of Parliament to work together to achieve the 3.5% target by 2035. Burnham emphasized the need for a fully funded path to meet these goals without compromising social security. Downing Street clarified that Burnham is committed to reducing the welfare budget but not through “crude cuts” that would push people into crisis or create larger costs elsewhere. The prime minister’s official spokesman said it is necessary to address welfare spending responsibly, but not at the expense of vulnerable groups. A spokesperson for Badenoch defended the Conservative plan, explaining that the £4 billion reduction from housing benefits would involve adjusting local housing allowances, exempting pensioners, and allowing tenancies to end. They argued that the changes would only require people to move out of the most expensive areas and that those on benefits should make the same choices as others in the private sector.