BREAKING news — the British empire is no more! The numerous countries invaded over several hundred years have won their independence and Britain is once again a small country stuck out on the edge of Europe.

But you wouldn’t think so from the pronouncements of both Labour and Tory governments, both of which have insisted that we’re still a major world power. The rest of us might just roll our eyes and leave them to their delusions but unfortunately, these have real-world effects that can’t be ignored.

The defence budget for 2026 is a whopping £62.2 billion, expected to rise to £73.5bn by 2028-9 and there is intensive lobbying to increase that even further. Much of this money is spent on nuclear weapons and hardware such as aircraft carriers, which cost about £10bn each, with fighter jets around £80 million each.

The unasked question is, do we actually need such a large army, navy and air force in today’s world? There’s an old cliche that generals always want the soldiers and equipment to fight the last war, not the next one and like all cliches, there’s a great deal of truth in that.

As can be seen by the current conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, much of the damage is done by relatively cheap drones, cyber-attacks and the destruction of infrastructure. Aircraft carriers are just expensive toys that would be completely useless at deterring a major power such as China, Russia or the US.

And why would any of those countries want to directly attack us anyway? Realistically, we’ve got very little they might want. The only reason is because of the policies British governments follow, in defending US governments come what may and as a member of US-led Nato alliance — the spectacularly one-sided “special relationship.”

You don’t have to be a supporter of Vladimir Putin (and I’m not) to understand that all big powers get nervous about incursions into their so-called “backyards,” with the long-running US campaign against Cuba an excellent example. It’s arguable that whoever was Russian president, s/he would want Nato to keep to the promise it made not to expand eastwards after the break-up of the USSR, a promise that was quickly and comprehensively broken.

The British role in both Nato and in the direct support given to the US in Iraq, Iran and elsewhere is peripheral at best and of no possible benefit to the British people. It’s a leftover from 1939-45, the last major war of the British empire.

The Attlee government made a massive political mistake by insisting on a British “nuclear deterrent” and resisting decolonisation. We are much more at risk with nuclear weapons than without and enormous sums of money continue to be diverted away from providing the social and health benefits we all want and have a right to expect.

So, what’s the alternative? It’s an exciting and positive one: Britain could become a genuinely neutral country that prioritises peacekeeping and conciliation in international conflicts. The job of the Secretary of State for Defence should be just that — the defence of Britain, not supporting other countries’ wars of aggression. The armed forces should be scaled back and all foreign bases returned — as Cyprus has recently suggested.

As a result, we would be safer, there would be lots more money for the NHS, education, housing and infrastructure projects, people would be happier and the manufactured hysteria over migration would fade. Britain would be respected and could call for nuclear non-proliferation without hypocrisy.

Many more well-paid jobs would be created and defence industries could benefit from an updated Lucas Aerospace plan to manufacture things people need, not bombs to blow them to pieces. Everybody wins.

Honestly, what’s not to like about that? But there may not be a politician brave enough to start the debate, so perhaps we need to start it for them…