Labour slammed over £2bn Army cuts that 'could leave vehicles stranded'

Labour slammed over £2bn Army cuts that 'could leave vehicles stranded' Labour has been slammed after cutting £2 billion from front-line Army equipment. Share Article Share Article Facebook X LinkedIn Reddit Bluesky Email Copy Link Link copied Add us as preferred source Comments By Jennifer Pinto , Audience writer 09:39, Tue, Oct 20, 2026 Updated: 09:44, Tue, Oct 20, 2026 Labour has cut £2 billion from front-line Army equipment. (Image: Getty) Labour has cut £2 billion from front-line Army equipment, which could reportedly leave army vehicles "stranded in full view of the enemy", it has been warned. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has abandoned plans to develop three new types of military vehicle as ministers attempt to address mounting pressure on the defence budget. One of the scrapped projects was designed to recover damaged or disabled Boxer armoured vehicles during combat. The Boxer is an eight-by-eight-wheeled, all-terrain, armoured transport vehicle. Wes Streeting , the Defence Secretary, has been warned that scrapping the project means Boxers could be left 'stranded in full view of the enemy' with no means of recovering them, The Telegraph reports. John Healey is under pressure to address an estimated £4.7bn gap in the defence budget, with the Government expected to identify savings across the MoD and other Whitehall departments. Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT The overall armed vehicle programme budget has now been cut from more than £7 billion to just over £5 billion as a result of “funding removal following Army re-prioritisation." The Army is due to receive more than 600 Boxer vehicles, which will serve a range of roles, including transporting infantry, providing command facilities and carrying out specialist support duties. Ambulance variants are also part of the programme. The full fleet is not expected to be delivered until at least 2031, although some vehicles have already begun arriving in Britain. Get the latest politics news - straight from our team in Westminster and more I would like to receive emails from the Daily Express featuring our latest products, services, offers, and promotions from across the Reach Plc family . Subscribe Invalid email You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info . Concerns have been raised about whether the Army will have the necessary recovery equipment to support the vehicles once they are deployed. Ben Obese-Jecty, a retired soldier and the Shadow Defence Procurement minister told The Telegraph: "With no repair and recovery assets to support Boxer in the field, it will be a near-impossible task to deploy any Boxer regiment operationally. Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT "We quite literally risk the vehicles becoming stranded in full view of the enemy if they break down or are damaged." James Cartlidge, the Shadow Defence Secretary, added: "They talk about increasing defence spending but then gut current procurement programmes to save cash. Article continues below ADVERTISEMENT Labour engulfed in fresh migrant chaos as Cabinet splits erupt sparking civil war fears Wes Streeting has been warned Boxers could be left "stranded in full view of the enemy." (Image: Getty) James Cartlidge also spoke to the news outlet. (Image: Getty) "All because they are unable and unwilling to cut welfare to fund defence." A Ministry of Defence's spokesperson said: “There are no changes to our committed £2.2b budget over the next four years for the delivery of our 623 Boxer vehicles, which includes support vehicles. “These changes relate to future spend that was uncommitted and we are exploring alternative options for maximum battlefield effectiveness.” Labour Party Defence Military Share Article Share Article Facebook X LinkedIn Reddit Bluesky Email Copy Link Link copied Add us as preferred source Comments