All these issues were touched on in a recent debate at the British TUC on 9 September 2025. It should be noted that the workers’ movement could have similar debates about just transition to a greener economy, with some unions taking a ‘jobs first’ approach, while others focus more on the broader social and environmental issues.

In 2022 the British TUC passed a motion which linked economic recovery in manufacturing industry to expansion of jobs in the defence sector, calling for the UK government to spend more on defence. This position was generally opposed by the left in the trade union movement, by anti-imperialists and by peace activists.

At UCU Congress 2025, UCU (University and College Union) put a motion to reverse this position. The UCU motion was carried by 2,871,000 votes to 2,291,000 votes on a card vote, a procedure which allows trade unions to cast a block vote at the TUC Congress.

The UCU motion was proposed by Jo Grady, UCU General Secretary. She spoke about the funding crisis in public services, arises from Thatcherism and 20 years of austerity. She explained the motion did not call for closure of the defence industry, but rather called for a reorientation of government expenditure and that there must be funding for alternative employment for defence workers. For trade unions it cannot just be a question of ‘jobs first’ when the products of the armaments industry are being used to kill and injure workers elsewhere.

The UCU motion was seconded by RMT (Rail, Marine and Transport) and supported by speakers from PCS (Public and Commercial Services), FBU (Fire Brigades Union), CWU (Communication Workers Union), TSSA (Transport Salaried Staffs Association) and NEU (National Education Union).

Speakers in support of the motion emphasised both the great need for more expenditure on public services and the imperialist adventures to which UK military expenditure has contributed. They also referred to arguments by governments that public expenditure on welfare must be cut to finance re-armament. Some did recognise that there were alternatives, such as a wealth tax on the very rich and getting businesses to pay their share of taxes. They also challenged the view that increased expenditure on defence would necessarily lead to a substantial increase in the number of manufacturing jobs in the UK. There was a clear view the Labour Government had got its priorities wrong and needed to change them to refocus on improving working class living standards and the quality of public services.

The resolution was opposed by Prospect (which represents engineers, managers and civil servants), GMB and Unite. Both GMB and UNITE put up first-time speakers to oppose. These unions represent workers in manufacturing and in the defence industry. They argued the UCU motion was divisive and was essentially an attack on the jobs of their members. They also argued that defence workers were not to blame for the crisis in public services and state welfare (no one had said they were). Some speakers against the motion were explicitly for re-armament and more expenditure of defence.

Much of the debate was about jobs and employment prospects and about the crisis in welfare services. There was also reference to the impact of the armaments industry on local economies.

In terms of international issues, clearly there was opposition to UK military support for Israel’s war on the Palestinian people, and for past imperialist wars. Ukraine was mentioned three times in the debate, twice by opponents of the motion and once by a supporter. Some opponents of Ukraine solidarity may represent this motion as a call to stop military assistance to Ukraine, but this is not included in the text of the UCU motion. It was a general expression of anti-militarism and a call for a refocus of government policy and expenditure.

Slogans such as ‘welfare, not warfare,’ ‘wages not weapons’ and ‘books not bombs’ express the priorities of the workers’ movement in countries where workers are not living in immediate or imminently threatened war situations. They can, although they do not need to, buy into an argument that these are the only alternatives in terms of government expenditure. Some contributors on both sides to the debate at the British TUC, recognised that, if increased military expenditure is needed, it can be financed by other means than cutting welfare, such as taxing the rich and increasing taxes on corporations. As internationalist we should recognise that these slogans speak to the needs of workers in some contexts, but do not work in situations like Ukraine, where the workers’ movement is fighting both for welfare and workers’ rights and against an imperialist invasion, and needs both military and humanitarian assistance.

The UCU motion reversed TUC policy from 2022 and should be understood as a clear signal from the TUC to the Labour Government that trade unions want to see massive investment in public services and an end to austerity.