UK Fashion Firms Urge Government to Make NHS and Army

Published: 15 September 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Fashion industry leaders, manufacturers and public figures are urging the UK government to ensure that uniforms for NHS workers and the armed forces are made domestically, arguing that public procurement could play a major role in protecting British manufacturing, supporting jobs and strengthening supply chains.

The campaign, led by the thinktank Fashion Roundtable, comes as the UK fashion industry prepares for London Fashion Week. More than 1,200 people have signed a letter calling for a greater commitment to British-made uniforms, with adventurer Ben Fogle and Great British Sewing Bee presenter Patrick Grant among those backing the appeal.

The letter is due to be delivered to Downing Street and calls on Andy Burnham to support a policy that would encourage the NHS and Ministry of Defence to source more of their clothing requirements from manufacturers operating within the UK.

Campaigners argue that government purchasing decisions could provide manufacturers with the stable demand needed to retain skilled workers, invest in production capacity and support economic activity in regions where textile and clothing industries have historically played an important role.

The issue has gained greater significance as concerns grow over the resilience of Britain’s manufacturing supply chains. According to an estimate by an economist working with Fashion Roundtable, the NHS and Ministry of Defence spend about £120m each year on uniforms, while around 55% of those garments are currently manufactured overseas.

For supporters of domestic production, redirecting a greater share of this spending towards UK factories would represent a relatively direct way for the government to support British industry through its own procurement decisions.

Fashion Roundtable described public procurement as one of the most significant tools available to support skills retention, inclusive economic growth and regional resilience. The organisation argues that awarding textile contracts to companies manufacturing in Britain could provide businesses with the confidence required to plan for the long term.

The experience of the Covid-19 pandemic has also strengthened arguments for more resilient domestic supply chains. The UK’s procurement of personal protective equipment became a major focus of criticism during the pandemic, while subsequent findings highlighted the enormous sums involved in purchasing PPE and the weaknesses exposed by dependence on international supply chains.

Scotland provides an example cited by campaigners of how domestic production can generate wider economic benefits. Scotland invested £102.7m in PPE and produced 88% of it domestically in 2021. The investment was estimated to have generated £66.7m in additional economic value and supported around 1,400 jobs.

Supporters of UK-made uniforms say the same principle could be applied to contracts for NHS and military clothing. Long-term government orders could give manufacturers greater certainty about future demand, allowing them to employ more people and invest in machinery, training and production facilities.

Kate Hills, founder of the manufacturing organisation Make It British, said contracts of this kind could give companies the breathing space needed to move beyond short-term survival. Greater certainty would allow manufacturers to consider expanding their workforce and making longer-term investment decisions.

The campaign also points to the United States, where military uniform procurement is subject to domestic manufacturing requirements under the Berry Amendment, legislation dating back to 1941. The policy has helped establish a system in which military clothing contracts are required to meet specific domestic sourcing rules.

The US military clothing market has continued to represent a significant commercial sector, with the industry valued at $1.62bn in 2025 according to figures cited by campaigners. The comparison is being used to demonstrate how government purchasing rules can influence the survival and development of domestic manufacturing industries.

Hills has expressed hope that Burnham could support a similar approach in Britain. She has pointed to his personal preference for UK-made clothing, including suits from Manchester-based brand Private White VC, as an indication that he understands the importance of domestic manufacturing.

Burnham has previously argued that government procurement should do more to support British manufacturers instead of simply selecting overseas suppliers on the basis of the lowest available price. Campaigners now want that principle to be applied more directly to uniforms used by public-sector workers and Britain’s armed forces.

Patrick Grant, who invested in Blackburn-based military outfitter Cookson & Clegg in 2015, is also backing the campaign. The company previously held a contract to manufacture uniforms for the British Army, although that contract ended in 2009. It now produces designs for Grant’s Community Clothing label, which has almost 2,000 employees.

Grant believes government procurement could provide precisely the type of predictable demand that manufacturers need to operate sustainably. He said businesses require steady work, visibility and long-term demand in order to invest confidently and maintain employment.

He has indicated that he would be keen for his businesses to compete for such contracts. However, he also raised concerns about the complexity of the public procurement process, saying that smaller and medium-sized manufacturers can struggle to participate because of the administrative demands involved.

According to Grant, the system can be difficult to navigate unless a company has a very large workforce and substantial administrative resources. He argued that reforming procurement procedures would therefore be necessary alongside any decision to reserve more contracts for British manufacturers.

The campaign also has a national security dimension. Questions have previously been raised about the production of some British military uniforms in China, with critics arguing that reliance on overseas suppliers could leave the UK vulnerable if geopolitical tensions disrupt supply chains.

Grant said that producing essential goods in countries with which Britain does not always have stable relationships could create serious resilience problems. If international circumstances suddenly changed, he warned, the UK could find itself without sufficient domestic capacity to replace overseas production quickly.

The argument extends beyond uniforms themselves. Supporters say maintaining domestic textile manufacturing would preserve skills and employment that could otherwise disappear. Once factories close and skilled workers leave the industry, rebuilding that capacity can be difficult and expensive.

The campaign is also being framed as part of a wider debate about the future of employment. Rapid advances in artificial intelligence are expected to transform many industries, creating uncertainty over the types of jobs that will remain available in the coming decade.

Grant argues that manufacturing offers an opportunity to think ahead by supporting jobs that will continue to be needed regardless of technological change. Public contracts for essential clothing, in his view, could help provide employment in communities while ensuring that important production capabilities remain available within Britain.

For the fashion industry, the campaign represents a shift in focus from consumer clothing to the wider industrial ecosystem that supports manufacturing. Britain’s fashion sector remains internationally recognised, but campaigners say its long-term strength depends on maintaining domestic production capabilities and skilled workers.

The proposal does not necessarily mean every uniform currently manufactured overseas would immediately move to British factories. Instead, supporters are calling for government procurement rules to give greater consideration to domestic production, supply-chain resilience, employment and the wider economic value created by public spending.

The debate also raises questions about the balance between cost and resilience. Overseas manufacturing can often offer lower prices, an important consideration for public bodies operating under financial constraints. But campaigners argue that the cheapest contract is not necessarily the most economical option when wider economic, employment and security considerations are included.

For UK manufacturers, a predictable stream of public contracts could provide an important foundation for investment. It could allow companies to train new workers, maintain equipment, increase capacity and develop expertise that could also benefit commercial customers.

The appeal comes at a significant moment for British manufacturing. While the UK remains a major centre for fashion design and creative industries, the production of garments has increasingly shifted overseas. Campaigners believe public procurement can help reverse some of that decline by creating dependable demand for domestic factories.

Ultimately, the campaign is asking the government to view uniforms not simply as another procurement expense but as an opportunity to support British industry. NHS staff and military personnel require uniforms regardless of economic conditions, making their procurement a potentially reliable source of demand for manufacturers.

Whether the government adopts such an approach remains uncertain. Any significant change would require consideration of procurement rules, costs, production capacity and the ability of British manufacturers to meet the required volume and specifications.

For the campaigners, however, the central argument is that government spending should deliver more than an immediate product at the lowest price. They believe it can also support employment, preserve skills, strengthen supply chains and maintain domestic manufacturing capacity.

As Britain considers how to protect its industrial base while preparing for a rapidly changing economy, the debate over NHS and military uniforms has become part of a much wider question: whether public money can be used strategically to ensure that essential manufacturing skills and jobs remain in the UK.