Ipsos polling data points to a public that has grown more anxious about gaps in national defence yet continues to hold reservations about expanding military spending — a tension playing out as ministers face questions over how the costs of rearmament will be funded ahead of the Budget.

Ipsos polling published recently found that roughly half of people in Britain would not take up arms to defend the country under any circumstances, a result that points to a tension running through public attitudes on national security. Among those polled, nearly half said they would not take up arms under any conditions — a proportion that climbed to more than half of female respondents while settling at roughly four in ten among male respondents. Voters holding that view were spread broadly across the political spectrum, with roughly half of Labour supporters (48 per cent), just under half of Reform UK backers (45 per cent), and four in ten Conservatives (40 per cent) all landing on the same position.

Survey data points to broader public backing for increased defence spending than for other budget priorities. A slim majority — 51 per cent, to be precise — would accept higher taxes, reduced public services, or additional government borrowing in exchange for greater spending on defence.

The figures place ministers in a position that carries no straightforward path forward. Polling data may show that people in Britain back higher defence spending, yet that support does not appear to extend to personal trust in the armed forces or any readiness to enlist. Only about 29 per cent of people — roughly three in every ten — rate the armed forces as being in a favourable condition, while roughly 36 per cent of those surveyed held an unfavourable view.

Fewer than half of respondents — 51 per cent — felt the armed forces were capable of repelling an attack on Britain, whereas nearly three-quarters, at 73 per cent, believed troops had a worthwhile part to play when domestic crises such as flooding arose.

The publication of these findings lands as Chancellor John Healey readies his first Budget for 28 October, a moment when questions about whether defence spending reflects genuine policy commitment or electoral positioning are drawing renewed attention.

Lord Dannatt, the former head of the British Army, put forward the view that the public would be more receptive to calls for higher defence expenditure if the government first laid out, in plain terms, the specific threats the country faces — adding that a clear lead from ministers on defence matters was needed to bring about broader national agreement on the case for a larger budget.

Polling data indicates that public backing for military expenditure tends to be stronger when the case is built around employment and economic returns, rather than positioned as a fiscal liability against a backdrop of mounting global unpredictability. A poll found that roughly three in four people in Britain would back a rise in defence spending on the condition that it generated employment, including apprenticeship places for younger workers.

Support for revenue-raising measures tends to soften once higher taxation enters the conversation. A poll found that nearly half of respondents — 46 per cent — backed raising taxes on incomes over £125,000 as a way to pay for defence spending. Only 4 per cent of those surveyed expressed appetite for lifting income tax on the £12,570–£50,000 earnings band, while backing for a VAT increase was thinner still, at 3 per cent. Support for raising duties on tobacco and alcohol stood at 39 per cent among those surveyed, yet war bonds drew a willingness to purchase from fewer than three in ten respondents.

Measured across the period since April of last year, the proportion favouring a tighter defence arrangement with the European Union has moved up nine percentage points, reaching 50 per cent, while the share endorsing a stronger alliance with NATO has gained ten points to land at 49 per cent. Backing for a tighter alliance with the United States registered at 37 per cent, a gain of four percentage points.

Fewer than four in ten respondents expressed confidence that the armed forces deliver adequate mental health provision for those in service and veterans, with barely half viewing the military as worth its cost.

Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, put forward a call for defence expenditure to reach 3 per cent of gross domestic product, contending that the government had allowed welfare commitments to take precedence over national security priorities. Recruitment figures released by the defence department pointed to inflows of new personnel outpacing departures, with officials contending that appetite for a career in the armed forces had been on the rise.

Polling data gathered by Ipsos, where Paskell holds a research director post, pointed to public opinion on the matter sitting on a knife-edge once voters were presented with the genuine compromises at stake. She argued that those in government would face questions about how spending on security could sit alongside the twin goals of safeguarding public services and keeping the economy on a stable footing.