Badenoch's second question focuses on Starmer's defence spending announcement yesterday.

She says it was her suggestion to fund the rise in defence spending by cutting aid, and that she's pleased Starmer accepted it - but asks exactly how much the increase constitutes.

Starmer claimed it would mean an extra £13.4bn a year, she says, but his defence secretary said it amounted to £6bn this morning. Which is it?

Starmer responds by saying Badenoch didn't feature in his thinking when coming up with this plan - and accuses her of being on a "desperate search for relevance".

The PM adds that the figure is based on comparing defence spending in 2024/25, of £66.3bn, with spending £79.7bn in 2027/28 - a difference of £13.4bn.

Starmer responds by saying Ukraine must, of course, be at the table for negotiations.

He says there can't be negotiations about Ukraine without Ukraine - adding that the issue is about the country's sovereignty and ability to decide its own future.

Kemi Badenoch kicks things off with a question on Ukraine.

The Tory leader says she and Keir Starmer are united in their support for the embattled country, and asks what steps he will take in Washington DC to ensure Ukraine is at the negotiating table for peace talks.

• For context: The US and Russia held talks last week in Saudi Arabia about ending the war in Ukraine, which Ukraine was not invited to join. Days later, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Trump of "living in a disinformation space" created by Russia, with Trump hitting back and calling Zeleneksy a "dictator".

Helen Catt
Political correspondent

PMQs can be one of the most challenging moments of a prime minister’s week. But today, Starmer goes into the session knowing it probably won’t be, as it's dwarfed by tomorrow’s crucial meeting with President Trump.

It's not always easy to guess what Kemi Badenoch will ask the PM - but we'll see soon.

The government’s position on Ukraine and the Trump visit is a contender, as is the planned rise in defence spending.

She has already said she supports the move but will she continue pressing him on if it will be enough?

Don’t forget the backbenchers either – will any of them raise the concerns about cutting the overseas aid budget to spend on defence?

There are also plenty of MPs with an interest in net zero – some of those could use the opportunity to quiz the PM about the advice the government’s been given this morning by the Climate Change Committee.

Keir Starmer is up at the dispatch box, marking the beginning of PMQs.

Stay tuned for text updates from us, and watch live at the top of the page.

Image source, PA Media

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has left Downing Street and is on his way to the House of Commons for this week's PMQs.

His clash with Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch will kick off at midday and we'll bring you all the key lines here.

As a reminder, you can also watch live for yourself at the top of the page when it starts.

After PMQs, the task facing Starmer is to mould Trump's position on Ukrainepublished at 11:52 Greenwich Mean Time

11:52 GMT

Chris Mason
Political editor

Image source, PA Media

A big moment and a big decision, ahead of a big meeting.

The government's announcement that it will crank up defence spending and shrivel the international aid budget amounts to a big shift in strategy, posture and political positioning.

Take a look at the Labour Party's election manifesto, written less than a year ago, if you would like proof of that.

On page 125, it says: "Labour is committed to restoring development spending at the level of 0.7% of gross national income as soon as fiscal circumstances allow."

The party is now committing to doing the precise opposite - cutting development spending by the same amount it had promised to raise it by.

There is nothing like an outspoken American president and an imminent visit to the White House to sharpen the mind - and hey presto, along came this announcement just as the prime minister packs his shirts for his trip across the Atlantic.

But it is also true that there has been a growing recognition for some time and across several parties that more money had to be spent on defence.

The task now facing Starmer - the second strand of the European tag team of leaders to visit Washington, after President Emmanuel Macron on Monday - is to attempt to mould US President Donald Trump's position.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is expected in Washington soon too.

It is not going to be easy and the next few weeks could prove crucial.

The British Army will see this as a start - but it needs more money than 2.5% of GDPpublished at 11:31 Greenwich Mean Time

11:31 GMT

Jonathan Beale
Defence correspondent

An increase in spending 2.5% of GDP on UK defence will certainly help Britain's Armed Forces, which have experienced severe cuts since the end of the Cold War.

But it will not get them everything they want - or completely reverse the "hollowing out" of the UK’s military capabilities.

Even before this extra cash injection, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) was facing a black hole in its equipment budget of around £17bn over the next decade, according to the National Audit Office.

The MoD is still having to fund big ticket items, such as renewing the UK’s nuclear deterrent as well as developing a new fighter jet programme - alongside Italy and Japan. Costs of such ambitious programmes tend to rise and no-one can be sure of the final bill.

Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine has highlighted the need for Britain to address its shortage of long-range artillery and ground-based air defence systems, and also the need for more drones.

The RAF wants to buy more F-35 jets. A fleet of new frigates is already being built for the Royal Navy, but it also wants new multi-role assault ships for the Royal Marines and a new fleet of solid support ships to sustain its two aircraft carriers on deployment.

This rise to 2.5% will not fund all that.

Does Starmer's claim of £13.4bn extra a year for defence spending add up?published at 11:22 Greenwich Mean Time

11:22 GMT

By Ben Chu, policy and analysis correspondent

The government has stood by Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s claim that its plans will increase defence spending by £13.4bn a year by 2027.

It says that’s based on comparing defence spending in 2024/25, of £66.3bn, with spending £79.7bn in 2027/28.

That is, indeed, a difference of £13.4bn.

Yet that figure would only make sense if you started from an assumption that defence spending would otherwise have remained flat over the three years to 2027/28.

In fact, defence spending was already projected to rise under the government’s previous spending plans.

If spending had stayed at £66.3bn until 2027 that would have been a real terms cut, and seen defence spending as a share of GDP drop - an implausible scenario.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has described the £13.4bn figure as "misleadingly large" and the think-tank argues that taking defence spending from 2.3% of GDP to 2.5% would actually represent an annual increase of around £6bn.

Yesterday lunchtime, the prime minister announced a sharp increase to defence spending to 2.5% of GDP – funded by cuts to the foreign aid budget.

That's £13.4bn more dedicated to defence each year from 2027, Starmer said.

The move was welcomed by the US administration, which has been calling for greater investment in defence from Europe, though Starmer says the move is his decision, accelerated by recent events.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch welcomed the defence boost but questioned the economic strategy underpinning it.

Lib Dems leader Ed Davey supported the defence spending but urged the money to come from seizing frozen Russian assets or higher taxes on multi-national tech companies.

The SNP's Stephen Flynn also backed the defence spend, but could not support "the populist playbook" of cutting aid to fund it.

Foreign development charities say the cuts are a "betrayal" while Labour MP Sarah Champion, who chairs the Commons International Development Committee, called on the government to "rethink" it.

Before PMQs gets under way, let's do a quick whiz around the key political headlines this week:

• Ukraine: Monday saw the prime minister suggest Donald Trump has "changed the global conversation" on Ukraine -it came just before he made an announcement on increasing the UK's defence spending
• Airport expansions: Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander backed proposals for an expansion at Gatwick airport ahead of a decision due tomorrow. Some MPs, local authorities and residents have voiced strong opposition
• Amesbury sentencing: In the courts, suspended Labour MP Mike Amesbury received a 10 week jail sentence after punching a man to the ground last October
• Police powers: The government is seeking to equip police with greater powers enabling them to search homes without a warrant for stolen mobile phones.
• ECHR: Kemi Badenoch suggested the UK would "probably have to leave" the European Convention of Human Rights if it continued to "stop us doing what is right for the people of this country and what is in our national interest"

Read more on all the stories leading our political coverage this week.

Image source, Reuters

Welcome back to Prime Minister’s Questions. This week, Keir Starmer is set to face MPs before setting off for a meeting in the White House with US President Trump tomorrow.

This afternoon’s session in the Commons follows a major increase in defence spending announced yesterday (which comes after repeated comments from Trump that Europe is not spending enough).

That's the story that has dominated the headlines in the last 24 hours, however there's been plenty more afoot in the political world this week - we’ll have some backgrounders with you shortly to get you up to speed.

Then, from 12:00 GMT, our reporters in the newsroom and the Commons will bring you live updates and snap analysis as PMQs gets under way.

You'll be able to follow along by pressing watch live at the top of this page – stay with us.