Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch are going head-to-head in PMQs – watch live above
Badenoch presses the prime minister on his approach to peace in Ukraine, as well as Zelensky and Trump's relationship, to an usually quiet Commons
Starmer reiterates that the US is a "reliable ally", and tells MPs: "We must not choose between the US and Europe"
The prime minister again points to President Trump's public backing for Nato – but it's telling in itself that such reassurances have to be sought, our political editor Chris Mason writes
Edited by Neha Gohil and Francesca Gillett, with Brian Wheeler reporting from the House of Commons
Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons
I spoke too soon. The speaker has just asked Tory MP Victoria Atkins to withdraw a remark amid much shouting.
It’s hard to tell from up here exactly what she said.
Chris Mason
Political editor in the House of Commons
For the second time in the last week or so, the prime minister has pointed out the Scottish National Party’s opposition to the UK’s nuclear weapons in answer to a question from an SNP MP.
At a moment where international conflict is dominating the news agenda, and less than 18 months from the Scottish Parliament elections, Sir Keir Starmer is repeatedly emphasising a significant difference of instinct between Labour and the SNP on national security.
The SNP's Chris Law says that this week Trump has ended military aid to Ukraine, reportedly banned the UK from sharing US intelligence with Ukraine, and is seeking to lift sanctions on Russia to "appease" Putin.
He says it's "clear for now the US can no longer be relied upon for security and peace in Europe" and asks if Starmer if he will urgently release seized Russian state assets to Ukraine.
Starmer says the profits on frozen Russian assets are being used to fund Ukraine and they are looking, with others, at whether "it's possible to go further".
He adds that at a time when defence and security in Europe needs to ramped up, for the SNP to maintain that it wants to get rid of the the nuclear deterrent, which he calls the "single most effective deterrent that we have", has to be "explained in its historical context".
More now from Lib Dem leader Ed Davey, who also asks about the Tate Brothers.
Should they stand trial in the UK, he asks, and will Starmer request the extradition of the Tate brothers who are now in the US?
Starmer says this is a live issue, and the principle is clear – justice must be done but won't go into details.
For background:British-American influencers Andrew and Tristan Tate – who are facing trial in Romania on charges including human trafficking, which they deny – have travelled to the US after Romanian prosecutors lifted a two-year travel ban. The brothers also face separate charges in the UK of rape and human trafficking. They deny all the allegations against them.
Read more about the Tate brothers arriving in the US.Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons
This is an unusual PMQs.
The sober and restrained exchanges between the leaders has had a calming effect on the rest of the session.
No shouting and pointing from frontbenchers on either side. So far, anyway.Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons
It falls to Ed Davey to ask the tough questions on Ukraine.
The Lib Dem leader echoes Kemi Badenoch’s concerns about reports that the US has barred the UK from sharing intelligence with Ukraine – but also asks if Donald Trump is a reliable ally.
He also raises the case of the Tate brothers – something the PM was probably not expecting.
Lib Dem leader Ed Davey says the PM said a minerals deal between the US and Ukraine was not enough of a security guarantee.
And since then, Trump has removed military aid for Ukraine and says the UK cannot share US intelligence with Kyiv.
This will embolden Vladimir Putin, Davey says.
Does the PM think Trump is a reliable ally, Davey asks, and does the PM have a plan B?
Starmer replies that of course the US is a reliable ally. The main focus is on a lasting peace in Ukraine. Brian Wheeler
Reporting from the House of Commons
“We were doing so well!” Keir Starmer couldn’t resist a comment on Kemi Badenoch’s final question which was a return to the usual PMQs knockabout, after a rare outbreak of civility and consensus on Ukraine.
Badenoch says people are worried about the country's economic security, and whether we can afford security guarantees.
She says they need an "entirely new approach" to economy and energy security, and asks the PM whether he'll change course.
"We were doing so well," Starmer replies, which gets a laugh from the house.
He goes on to say that they inherited economic insecurity and they have "turned that around".
Badenoch thanks the prime minister for his comments to her previous question and adds "that it is not just the security situation that worries people" – touching on trade wars and tariffs.
"Following the prime minister's trip to Washington, have talks on a trade deal begun?" Badenoch asks.
Starmer responds to Badenoch's penultimate question saying they did discuss this and "agreed our teams will sit down rapidly".
"That is what they are doing," Starmer says, adding that this approach is "far better than getting drawn into conflict with tariffs".Chris Mason
Political editor
The prime minister has again pointed to President Trump’s public backing for Nato's Article 5 – the commitment of each member to come to the assistance of another in the event of an attack.
But it is telling in itself that such reassurances have to be sought – as Nato's capacity for deterrence relies on Article 5 being sacrosanct and so beyond even the subject of discussion.
It would be a little bit like having to be reassured that your front door keys will actually open your front door.
The prospect that they won’t isn’t normal.
Badenoch says there are concerning reports the US has instructed the UK to suspend intelligence sharing with Ukraine and that the five eyes intelligence pact "may be at risk".
We need to make sure the US does not "disengage", she says, but asks if Starmer agrees that without the US, any peace agreement would place a "terrible" burden on Britain and taxpayers.
Starmer says he does agree and says he has been clear we need to ensure the UK, US, Europe and Ukraine are working together, but that the UK must not choose between the US and Europe.
Badenoch says the aim of Starmer's visit to Washington was to get security guarantees for Ukraine – but then President Trump subsequently withdraw military aid for the country.
What steps is the PM taking, she asks, to persuade President Trump to provide security guarantees.
Starmer replies that he did discuss the security guarantees with Trump – he says Trump was clear he has our backs.
Starmer adds that he has spoken to Trump three times since then to make sure there are proper security guarantees.
Leader of the opposition Kemi Badenoch asks the PM if he can reassure those who are concerned about the UK being drawn into war.
"Yes," Starmer replies, adding that it's the "last thing anybody wants to see".
He says the way to ensure peace is to ensure there are guarantees in place.
The risk of conflict is if Putin thinks he can breach any deal, Starmer adds.
Sir Keir Starmer gets to his feet to respond to Badenoch's first question.
"We need to do everything we can to ensure the US, Europe and Ukraine are working together on lasting peace," the prime minister answers.
Starmer adds that he is in "regular contact with all the key players" – including talking with President Volodymyr Zelensky yesterday afternoon.
Kemi Badenoch's first question to Starmer focuses on Ukraine, saying divisions between it and the US only serve Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Zelensky is right to try and rebuild his relationship with Trump, he's keeping a "cool head under very difficult circumstances", she says.
She asks the PM what he is doing to help rebuild their relationship after a challenging week.Chris Mason
Political editor
A notable start to PMQs after US Vice-President JD Vance was apparently dismissive of the military sacrifices of allies in an interview with Fox News earlier this week.
The prime minister notably lists some of those lost in conflict, in the week their families are marking the anniversary of their deaths.
Henry Zeffman
Chief political correspondent
There are clear political sensitivities in where the cuts to welfare spending are likely to fall. The Labour Party has many factions and ideological nuances but all of its MPs are committed to a generous welfare state and many will be antsy at the prospect of welfare cuts.
Those in government are adamant, though, that the numbers – which are rising fast – of claimants and the amount being spent by government are simply unsustainable. There will be reform as well as cuts — Reeves has identified what she sees as “perverse incentives” in the system.Henry Zeffman
Chief political correspondent
The government briefing that Rachel Reeves will make large spending cuts this month is very significant, in several different ways.
First, it confirms what had been rumoured – that the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), the independent forecaster, believes that the chancellor’s "headroom" has been eliminated. This is the £10bn worth of leeway which, as of last October, the OBR believed the government had before breaking its self-imposed borrowing rules.
Why has that headroom disappeared? The government’s clear view is that this is because of global factors – tariffs being imposed by President Trump, broader uncertainty emanating from the new US administration, persistent inflation in the UK and elsewhere, and the rising cost of government borrowing.
But there will be a big political argument about this. The Conservatives will contend that the cost of government borrowing was rising even before President Trump took office and that the tax rises in Reeves’s Budget in October were a major factor, as well as in stunting growth.
Read more: Reeves's proposed cuts will trigger big political arguments
Keir Starmer is now on his feet in the House of Commons, ready for another round of PMQs.
Copyright © 2025 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
