Just to be clear, my intervention was about underinvestment in defence by successive governments. In a way, it goes back to about the 1970s. It's coming to roost now.
To be fair, in the last two governments, there's been more focus on defence. As I said, the defence policy of “Strong, Secure, Engaged” was the most significant planned increase in defence spending.
Does this have a diplomatic impact on us, the fact that we're getting farther away from the 2% goal? Absolutely. Does it have a reputational impact? It absolutely has a reputational impact, and that can be filled through doing more.
In my heart of hearts, I would like to see a path to 2%, or a path to a path to 2%, if that's possible. I would like to see specific investments in defence, security and diplomacy. I'd love to see an integrated policy. You can't do defence policy in a vacuum, without our foreign policy priorities being set. Have it fully integrated like the U.K. does. Have more investment in CAF people. Have more investment on North American defence—not just NORAD, but air and land, submarines, cyber, and above all, people. We can step up and do more as it's needed.
NATO has to do a lot more now with the war against Ukraine. All allies need to step up.