UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Keir Starmer

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Security Vetting

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Security Vetting

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 20 April 2026.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to provide the House with information that I now have about the appointment of Peter Mandelson as our ambassador to the United States.

    Before I go into the details, I want to be very clear with this House that while this statement will focus on the process surrounding Peter Mandelson’s vetting and appointment, at the heart of this there is also a judgment I made that was wrong. I should not have appointed Peter Mandelson. I take responsibility for that decision, and I apologise again to the victims of the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who were clearly failed by my decision.

    Last Tuesday evening, 14 April, I found out for the first time that on 29 January 2025, before Peter Mandelson took up his position as ambassador, Foreign Office officials granted him developed vetting clearance, against the specific recommendation of the United Kingdom Security Vetting that developed vetting clearance should be denied. Not only that, but the Foreign Office officials who made that decision did not pass this information to me, to the Foreign Secretary, to her predecessor, now the Deputy Prime Minister, to any other Minister, or even to the former Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald.

    I found this staggering. Therefore, last Tuesday I immediately instructed officials in Downing Street and the Cabinet Office to urgently establish the facts on my authority. I wanted to know who made the decision, on what basis, and who knew. I wanted that information for the precise and explicit purpose of updating this House, because this is information I should have had a long time ago, and that this House should have had a long time ago. It is information that I and the House had a right to know.

    I will now set out a full timeline of the events in the Peter Mandelson process, including from the fact-finding exercise that I instructed last Tuesday. Before doing so, I want to remind and reassure the House that the Government will comply fully with the Humble Address motion of 4 February.

    In December 2024, I was in the process of appointing a new ambassador for Washington. A due diligence exercise was conducted by the Cabinet Office into Peter Mandelson’s suitability, including questions put to him by my staff in No. 10. Peter Mandelson answered those questions on 10 December, and I received final advice on the due diligence process on 11 December. I made the decision to appoint him on 18 December. The appointment was announced on 20 December. The security vetting process began on 23 December 2024.

    I want to make it clear to the House that, for a direct ministerial appointment, it was usual for security vetting to happen after the appointment but before the individual starting in post. That was the process in place at the time. This was confirmed by the former Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald, when he gave evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 3 November 2025. Sir Chris made it clear that

    “when we are making appointments from outside the civil service…the normal thing is for the security clearance to happen after appointment but before the person signs a contract and takes up post.”

    At the same hearing of the same Select Committee, the former permanent secretary to the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, said that Peter Mandelson

    “did not hold national security vetting when he was appointed, but, as is normally the case with external appointments to my Department and the wider civil service, the appointment was made subject to obtaining security clearance.”

    After I sacked Peter Mandelson, I changed that process so that an appointment now cannot be announced until after security vetting is passed.

    The security vetting was carried out by UK Security Vetting—UKSV—between 23 December 2024 and 28 January 2025. UKSV conducted vetting in the normal way, collecting relevant information, as well as interviewing the applicant, in this case on two occasions. Then, on 28 January 2025, UKSV recommended to the Foreign Office that developed vetting clearance should be denied to Peter Mandelson. The following day, 29 January 2025, notwithstanding the UKSV recommendation that developed vetting clearance should be denied, Foreign Office officials made the decision to grant developed vetting clearance for Peter Mandelson.

    To be clear, for many Departments a decision from UKSV is binding, but for the Foreign Office the final decision on developed vetting clearance is made by Foreign Office officials, not UKSV. However, once the decision in this case came to light, the Foreign Office’s power to make the final decision on developed vetting clearance was immediately suspended by my Chief Secretary last week.

    I accept that the sensitive personal information provided by an individual being vetted must be protected from disclosure. If that were not the case, the integrity of the whole process would be compromised. What I do not accept is that the appointing Minister cannot be told of the recommendation by UKSV. Indeed, given the seriousness of these issues and the significance of the appointment, I simply do not accept that Foreign Office officials could not have informed me of UKSV’s recommendations while maintaining the necessary confidentiality that vetting requires.

    There is no law that stops civil servants from sensibly flagging UKSV recommendations while protecting detailed, sensitive vetting information, to allow Ministers to make judgments on appointments or on explaining matters to Parliament. Let me be very clear: the recommendation in the Peter Mandelson case could and should have been shared with me before he took up his post. Let me make a second point: if I had known before Peter Mandelson took up his post that the UKSV recommendation was that developed vetting clearance should be denied, I would not have gone ahead with the appointment.

    Let me now move to September 2025, because events then, and subsequently, show with even starker clarity the opportunities missed by Foreign Office officials to make the position clear. On 10 September, Bloomberg reported fresh details of Mandelson’s history with Epstein. It was then clear to me that Peter Mandelson’s answers to my staff in the due diligence exercise were not truthful, and I sacked him. I also changed the direct ministerial appointments process so that full due diligence is now required as standard. Where risks are identified, an interview must be taken pre-appointment to discuss any risks and conflicts of interest. A summary of that should be provided to the appointing Minister. I also made it clear that public announcements should not now be made until security vetting has been completed.

    In the light of the revelations in September last year, I also agreed with the then Cabinet Secretary, Sir Chris Wormald, that he would carry out a review of the appointment process in the Peter Madelson case, including the vetting. He set out his findings and conclusions in a letter to me on 16 September. In that letter, he advised me:

    “The evidence I have reviewed leads me to conclude that appropriate processes were followed in both the appointment and withdrawal of the former HMA Washington”.

    When the then Cabinet Secretary was asked about that last week, he was clear that when he carried out his review, the Foreign Office did not tell him about the UKSV recommendation that developed vetting clearance should be denied for Peter Mandelson. I find that astonishing. As I set out earlier, I do not accept that I could not have been told about the recommendation before Peter Mandelson took up his post. I absolutely do not accept that the then Cabinet Secretary—an official, not a politician—when carrying out his review could not have been told that UKSV recommended that Peter Mandelson should be denied developed vetting clearance. It was a vital part of the process that I had asked him to review. Clearly, he could have been told, and he should have been told.

    On the same day that the then Cabinet Secretary wrote to me, 16 September 2025, the Foreign Secretary and the then permanent secretary of the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, provided a signed statement to the Foreign Affairs Committee. The statement says:

    “The vetting process was undertaken by UK Security Vetting on behalf of the FCDO and concluded with DV clearance being granted by the FCDO in advance of Lord Mandelson taking up post in February.”

    It went on to say:

    “Peter Mandelson’s security vetting was conducted to the usual standard set for Developed Vetting in line with established Cabinet Office policy”.

    Let me be very clear to the House. This was in response to questions that included whether concerns were raised, what the Foreign Office’s response was and whether they were dismissed. That the Foreign Secretary was advised on, and allowed to sign, this statement by Foreign Office officials without being told that UKSV had recommended Peter Mandelson be denied developed vetting clearance is absolutely unforgivable. This is a senior Cabinet Member giving evidence to Parliament on the very issue in question.

    In the light of further revelations about Peter Mandelson in February of this year, I was very concerned about the fact that developed vetting clearance had been granted to him. Not knowing that, in fact, UKSV had recommended denial of developed vetting clearance, I instructed my officials to carry out a review of the national security vetting process. But, as I have set out, I do not accept that I could not have been told about UKSV’s denial of security vetting before Peter Mandelson took up his post in January 2025, I do not accept that the then Cabinet Secretary could not have been told in September 2025 when he carried out his review of the process, and I do not accept that the Foreign Secretary could not have been told when making statements to the Select Committee, again in 2025.

    On top of that, the fact that I was also not told, even when I ordered a review of the UKSV process, is frankly staggering. I can tell the House that I have now updated the terms of reference for the review into security vetting to make sure it covers the means by which all decisions are made in relation to national security vetting. I have appointed Sir Adrian Fulford to lead the review. Separately, I have asked the Government Security Group in the Cabinet Office to look at any security concerns raised during Peter Mandelson’s tenure.

    I know that many Members across this House will find these facts to be incredible. To that, I can only say that they are right. It beggars belief that throughout this whole timeline of events, officials in the Foreign Office saw fit to withhold this information from the most senior Ministers in our system of government. That is not how the vast majority of people in this country expect politics, government or accountability to work, and I do not think it is how most public servants think it should work either.

    I work with hundreds of civil servants—thousands, even—all of whom act with the utmost integrity, dedication and pride to serve this country, including officials from the Foreign Office who, as we speak, are doing a phenomenal job representing our national interest in a dangerous world—in Ukraine, the middle east and all around the world. This is not about them, yet it is surely beyond doubt that the recommendation from UKSV that Peter Mandelson should be denied developed vetting clearance was information that could and should have been shared with me on repeated occasions and, therefore, should have been available to this House and ultimately to the British people. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on the Middle East

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on the Middle East

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 13 April 2026.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to update the House on my visit to the Gulf, the evolving situation in the middle east and the implications for Britain’s security.

    Before I do that, I want to put on the record in this House my total determination to make the changes across the entire state that are so clearly necessary to honour the victims, the injured and the families of Southport. Today’s report is harrowing. It is difficult to read and I cannot begin to imagine the pain upon pain that it will cause the families it affects. Our thoughts are with them today. The Home Secretary will respond to the report in full after this statement.

    Last week I visited the Gulf and was able to thank in person some of the brave men and women who, from day one of the US-Iran conflict, have resolutely defended the interests of this country, its people and its partners. I thank them again, in this House, for their courage and their service. I am sure the whole House will join me in those thanks.

    While in the Gulf, I met leaders and senior military representatives across the region, including the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, the President of the United Arab Emirates, the King and Crown Prince of Bahrain, and the Emir and Prime Minister of Qatar. In recent days, I have also spoken to the Sultan of Oman and the Emir of Kuwait. Across all those conversations, I agreed to deepen our engagement on both defence and economic resilience, because they all made it abundantly clear that the solidarity and strength of our partnership with them has been a comfort in these challenging times. We should not forget that the nature of Iran’s response—the indiscriminate attack upon countries that never sought this conflict and the huge damage done across the Gulf to civilian infrastructure, with civilian casualties—is abhorrent. It has clearly shocked the region and all of us.

    We must bear that in mind now as we lift our sights to the future, because while the ceasefire between the US, Israel and Iran is undeniably welcome, it is also highly fragile. The region remains on edge and a lot of work is required to reopen the strait of Hormuz and de-escalate the situation, leading to a sustainable ceasefire. In pursuit of that goal, we call for Lebanon to be included, urgently, in the ceasefire. Diplomacy is the right path and I welcome the talks taking place this week. Hezbollah must disarm, but I am equally clear that Israel’s strikes are wrong. They are having devastating humanitarian consequences and pushing Lebanon into a crisis. The bombing should stop now.

    We also put on record our thanks to Pakistan and other partners for playing such an important role in diplomatic efforts. We hope the process will continue without further escalation. That applies to the running sore that is the strait of Hormuz, shamefully exploited by Iran. All the leaders I met were crystal clear that freedom of navigation is vital and must be restored—no conditions, no tolls and no tolerance of Iran holding the world’s economy to ransom. The impact of Iran’s behaviour in the strait is causing untold economic damage that is visible on every petrol forecourt in this country.

    My guide from the start of this conflict has always been our national interest. That is why we stayed out of the war and why we continue to stay out of the war. It is why we are working now to restore freedom of navigation in the middle east—because that is squarely in our national interest. Clearly, that is not a straightforward task, and it will take time. I have met UK businesses in energy, shipping, insurance and finance, and they are clear that vessels will not be put through the strait until they are confident that it is safe to do so. That is why we are working around the clock on a credible plan to reopen the strait.

    I can confirm today that together with President Macron, I will convene a summit of leaders this week to drive forward the international effort we have built in recent weeks, bringing together dozens of countries to ensure freedom of navigation in the strait of Hormuz. The summit will be focused on two things: first, diplomatic efforts to bring pressure to bear for a negotiated end to the conflict and for the strait to be opened; secondly, military planning to provide assurance to shipping as soon as a stable environment can be established. Let me be very clear: this is about safeguarding shipping and supporting freedom of navigation once the conflict ends. Our shared aim is a co-ordinated, independent, multinational plan. This is the moment for clear and calm leadership and, notwithstanding the difficulties, Britain stands ready to play our part.

    Let me return to the impact of the conflict on our economy. We all know that the consequences will be significant and that they will last longer than the conflict itself. We continue to monitor the effects. I remind the House that energy bills went down on 1 April and that whatever happens in the middle east, those bills will stay down until July. We are investing more than £50 million to support heating oil customers, and fuel duty is frozen until September—all because of the decisions this Government took at the Budget.

    However, there is a wider point. We cannot stand here in this House and pretend that a global shock threatening to hit the living standards of British people is somehow a novel experience; Britain has been buffeted by crises for decades now. From the 2008 financial crash, through austerity, Brexit, covid, the war that still rages in Ukraine and the disastrous premiership of Liz Truss, the response each time has been to try to return to the status quo—a status quo that manifestly failed working people, who saw their living standards flatline and their public services decimated.

    This time, Britain’s response must and will be different to reflect the changing world we live in. That starts with our economic security: during this conflict alone, we have capped energy bills, raised the living wage, strengthened workers’ rights and ended the two-child limit, which will lift nearly half a million children out of poverty. Looking forward, it also means a closer economic relationship with our European allies, because Brexit did deep damage to the economy, and the opportunities we now have to strengthen our security and cut the cost of living are simply too big to ignore.

    It continues with our energy security. I say once again that oil and gas will be part of our energy mix for decades to come. However, we do not set the global price for oil and gas. Households across the country are fed up with international events beyond their control pushing up their energy bills. I stand with them on that. We will go further and faster on our mission to make Britain energy-independent, because that is the only way we will get off the fossil fuel rollercoaster and take control of our energy bills.

    Finally, we must strengthen our defence security. That means boosting our armed forces, as we have, with the biggest sustained investment since the cold war. It means doubling down on the most successful military alliance the world has ever seen, of which this party in government was a founding member: the NATO alliance. It also means strengthening the European element of that alliance, taking control of our continent’s defence more robustly, and deepening our partnerships, as we have done with our deals to build Norwegian frigates on the Clyde and Turkish Typhoons in Lancashire. Not only is that creating thousands of secure jobs and opportunities for our defence industry right across the country, but it is enhancing the way that our armed forces can collaborate with our allies.

    As the middle east conflict shows once more, the world in which we live has utterly changed. It is more volatile and insecure than at any period in my lifetime. We must rise to meet it calmly, but with strength. That is exactly what we are doing at home and abroad. We are strengthening our security, taking control of our future and building a Britain that is fair for all. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on the Situation in the Middle East

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on the Situation in the Middle East

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 12 April 2026.

    I know the consequences of the situation in the Middle East are being felt right across the country.

    It’s why throughout this conflict I’ve been clear that we must see a full de-escalation.

    The Iran war has been a warning to us. Britain must build up its resilience – both at home and with our allies in Europe.

    We should not be at the mercy of events abroad and we can’t manage this crisis by desperately trying to return to the status quo.

    That’s why we will build a Britain that is stronger, more secure and more resilient.

    That is what this moment demands and it’s my focus.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Wireless Festival

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Wireless Festival

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 7 April 2026.

    Kanye West should never have been invited to headline Wireless.

    This government stands firmly with the Jewish community, and we will not stop in our fight to confront and defeat the poison of antisemitism.

    We will always take the action necessary to protect the public and uphold our values.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Easter Message

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Easter Message

    The message made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 3 April 2026.

    Easter is a celebration of hope, new life and renewal.

    Across the country, churches and Christian communities quietly and tirelessly support families, children and neighbours – offering comfort, bringing people together, and standing alongside those who need it most. It is precisely that spirit of service which exemplifies national renewal, and reflects the very heart of Christ’s example.

    This Easter comes at a time of real anxiety for many people. Conflicts abroad, pressures at home, and uncertainty about the future weigh heavily on families and households. In moments like these, faith offers reassurance and grounding – a reminder that we are not alone, and that hope can still take root even in difficult soil.

    For generations, churches have been rooted in their neighbourhoods, working to combat poverty, fear and isolation. In times when some seek to divide, the Government is committed to working across faiths and differences to build a country that is more resilient, inclusive and connected. That is why we are keen to partner with churches, alongside other faith and belief groups, to strengthen and transform local communities through programmes such as Pride in Place and Best Start Family Hubs, among others.

    Our country is at its best when we choose community over division, kindness over indifference, and service over self‑interest. I thank everyone who gives their time through churches and Christian charities, and wish Christians across the UK and around the world a very happy Easter filled with peace, hope and the promise of new life.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Comments on Easing the Cost of Living

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Comments on Easing the Cost of Living

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 1 April 2026.

    In an uncertain and volatile world, it is my government’s duty to protect the British people at home and abroad.

    I know the public are concerned about the conflict in Iran and what it means for them and their families.

    I want to reassure them that they have a government on their side, working with allies on de-escalation and bearing down on the cost of living.

    Today, millions of people up and down the country will see energy bills go down by £117, wages go up for the lowest paid, and more support will be available for people who need it most – because of the decisions this government has taken.

    But we must go further to bear down on costs, and that means pushing for de-escalation in the Middle East and a re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz. That is the best way we can bring down the cost of living for families and that is my focus.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Iran

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Iran

    The statement made by Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 1 March 2026.

    Yesterday, I spoke to you about the situation in the Gulf and explained that the United Kingdom was not involved in the strikes on Iran. 

    That remains the case.

    Over the last two days Iran has launched sustained attacks across the region at countries who did not attack them.

    They’ve hit airports and hotels where British citizens are staying. 

    This is clearly a dangerous situation. 

    We have at least 200,000 British citizens in the region – residents, families on holiday, and those in transit. 

    I ask all our people in the region to please register your presence and follow Foreign Office travel advice.  

    I know this is a deeply worrying time and we will continue to do all we can to support you.

    Our Armed Forces who are located across the region are also being put at risk by Iran’s actions.  

    Yesterday Iran hit a military base in Bahrain, narrowly missing British personnel.

    The death of the Supreme Leader will not stop Iran from launching these strikes. 

    Their approach is becoming even more reckless – and more dangerous to civilians.

    Our decision that the UK would not be involved with the strikes on Iran was deliberate.

    Not least because we believe that the best way forward for the region and for the world is a negotiated settlement.

    One in which Iran agrees to give up any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon.

    But Iran is striking British interests nonetheless, and putting British people at huge risk, along with our allies across the region. 

    That is the situation we face today. 

    Our partners in the Gulf have asked us to do more to defend them, and it is my duty to protect British lives.  

    We have British jets in the air as part of coordinated defensive operations which have already successfully intercepted Iranian strikes. 

    But the only way to stop the threat is to destroy the missiles at source – in their storage depots or the launchers which used to fire the missiles.

    The United States has requested permission to use British bases for that specific and limited defensive purpose. 

    We have taken the decision to accept this request – to prevent Iran firing missiles across the region, killing innocent civilians, putting British lives at risk, and hitting countries that have not been involved.

    The basis of our decision is the collective self-defence of longstanding friends and allies, and protecting British lives.

    That is in accordance with international law. And we are publishing a summary of our legal advice.

    We are not joining these strikes, but we will continue with our defensive actions in the region.

    And we will also bring experts from Ukraine together with our own experts to help Gulf partners shoot down Iranian drones attacking them.

    I want to be very clear: we all remember the mistakes of Iraq. 

    And we have learned those lessons. 

    We were not involved in the initial strikes on Iran and we will not join offensive action now.

    But Iran is pursuing a scorched earth strategy – so we are supporting the collective self-defence of our allies and our people in the region. 

    Because that is our duty to the British people.

    It is the best way to eliminate the urgent threat and prevent the situation spiralling further.

    This is the British government protecting British interests and British lives.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Iran

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Statement on Iran

    The statement made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 28 February 2026.

    Earlier this morning, the United States and Israel struck targets in Iran.

    Iran has since launched indiscriminate strikes across the region.

    I know the British people and communities across our country will be deeply concerned about what this means for security and stability and for the fate of innocent people across the region – which for so many of us includes friends and family members.

    So while the situation is evolving very quickly, I want to set out our response.

    The United Kingdom played no role in these strikes.

    But we have long been clear – the regime in Iran is utterly abhorrent.

    They have murdered thousands of their own people, brutally crushed dissent, and sought to destabilise the region.

    Even in the United Kingdom, the Iranian regime poses a direct threat to dissidents and the Jewish community.

    Over the last year alone, they have backed more than 20 potentially lethal attacks on UK soil.

    So it’s clear – they must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.

    That remains the primary aim of the United Kingdom and our allies – including the US.

    I condemn Iran’s attacks today on partners across the region, many of which are not parties to this conflict.

    We extend our support and solidarity to them.

    As part of our commitments to the security of our allies in the Middle East we have a range of defensive capabilities in the region – which we’ve recently taken steps to strengthen.

    Our forces are active and British planes are in the sky today as part of coordinated regional defensive operations to protect our people, our interests, and our allies – as Britain has done before, in line with international law. 

    We’ve stepped up protections for British bases and personnel to their highest level.

    We are also reaching out to UK nationals in the region and doing everything we can to support them.

    I have been speaking with leaders today – from the E3, and across the region.

    It is vital now that we prevent further escalation and return to a diplomatic process. 

    We want to see peace and security, and the protection of civilian life. 

    Iran can end this now. 

    They should refrain from further strikes, give up their weapons programmes, and cease the appalling violence and repression against the Iranian people – who deserve the right to determine their own future, in line with our longstanding position. 

    That is the route to de-escalation and back to the negotiating table.

  • Keir Starmer – Statement on Fourth Anniversary of Invasion of Ukraine

    Keir Starmer – Statement on Fourth Anniversary of Invasion of Ukraine

    The statement made by Sir Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 24 February 2026.

    Good morning, colleagues. And before we get into our usual business today, I just wanted to say a few words to mark the four years of the conflict in Ukraine. That’s four years of Putin aggression. Four long years and four long years of suffering in Ukraine. And, you will have your own images and memories of that suffering.

    I’ve got three etched in my mind. The first is in the early days when I went to Kyiv after conflict broke out, I went to Bucha, which is just outside Kyiv, and saw for myself the roads and the ditches in which Ukrainian civilians were handcuffed with their hands behind their back, blindfolded and shot in the head and the bodies left in the road.

    I’d seen the images on film, but I went to see for myself the actual place and talked to the communities there. It was their families. It was their brothers and sisters. It was their communities. And they were left, as they described to me, to pick up the bodies, put them in shopping trolleys and take them to the local church where they put them in a mass grave.

    The second etched in my memory was last year when I went to one of the busiest hospitals in Kyiv and saw for myself the incredibly awful burns on some of those who had returned from the frontline, the like of which I’d never seen in my life before. And at the same time, I went to a primary school to meet children who were five, six, seven years old, and had lost both their parents to the conflict.

    There will be many examples, including the recent attacks on the energy system, when was -18 degrees and left people freezing in their homes. But that is the suffering inflicted by the aggression of Putin. My message to you, the Cabinet, and to the country today, as we mark this four years, is that we stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

    I wanted also to pay tribute to the incredible resilience of the Ukrainians. And it is incredible resilience. When this conflict broke out four years ago, it was assumed it would be a matter of weeks before Putin took the whole of Ukraine. That’s what everybody believed to be the case. Four years later, the Ukrainians are holding out against that aggression. Holding out on the front line where the circumstances are extremely challenging, but also holding out in the civilian life, where every day Ukrainians get up and go to work as a sign of resilience and defiance of the aggression.

    And, we must defeat the falsehood that Russia is winning. Because if you take the last year alone, Russia took 0.8%, of land in Ukraine at a terrible cost to themselves of half a million losses. So we pay tribute to the resilience of Ukrainians. We all want a just and lasting peace. And that is what we’re all working so hard for.

    It must be just. And it must be lasting. That’s why we set up a coalition of the willing a year ago, to do the work that was necessary on security guarantees. And I’m chairing a meeting of the Coalition of the Willing, immediately after this Cabinet to try and take that work further forward. But let’s be clear in terms of getting to that just and lasting peace, it is Putin who is standing in the way.

    Zelenskyy has shown willing. He’s taken the lead. It is Putin who is standing in the way. And that’s why we must always double down on our support for Ukraine. That means capability. It means resource. It means more sanctions. And today, I’m pleased that we’re announcing the biggest package since 2022. In terms of sanctions package. That’s 300 Russian energy companies that are being targeted.

    And we’re doing a lot more work on the shadow fleet, which is essential in terms of weakening the ability of Russia to continue with this aggression.

    And then finally this, because this is not a remote conflict a long way away from the United Kingdom. It’s about us on so many levels. It’s about our values of freedom, democracy, and the right of a country to decide for itself what it does, which is democracy and sovereignty.

    It has already impacted us over and above the work we’ve done on capability, resource sanctions, etc., because it has hit every family with the cost of living. Energy prices doubled at the beginning of this conflict. They’re still 40% higher than they were before the conflict. And so every family is feeling this, and how and when this conflict ends is going to affect everybody in the United Kingdom, for a very long time, which is why it’s so important that we make sure that there’s a just and lasting peace.

    And Ukraine is very much the frontline of our freedom, but we need to bear that in mind as we lost four years since the outbreak of this conflict. Thank you, colleagues.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Speech at the Munich Security Conference

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Speech at the Munich Security Conference

    The speech made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 14 February 2026.

    For many years, for most people in the United Kingdom, war has been remote. Something that concerns us deeply, but which happens far off.

    But now we feel the solidity of peace, the very ground of peace now softening under our feet. It is the job of leaders to be ahead of these seismic shifts. Yet that is against the grain of history.

    Time and again, leaders have looked the other way, only re-arming when disaster is upon them. This time, it must be different. Because all of the warning signs are there.

    Russia has proved its appetite for aggression, bringing terrible suffering to the Ukrainian people. 

    Its hyper-threats extend across our continent, not just threatening our security, but tearing at our social order. 

    Collaborating with populists to undermine our values. Using disinformation to sow division. Using cyber-attacks and sabotage to disrupt our lives and deepening the cost-of-living crisis.

    It is true that Russia has made a huge strategic blunder in Ukraine, and the Russian casualties number well over a million. But even as the war goes on, Russia is re-arming, reconstituting their armed forces, an industrial base. 

    NATO has warned that Russia could be ready to use military force against the Alliance by the end of this decade. In the event of a peace deal in Ukraine, which we are all working hard to achieve, Russia’s re-armament would only accelerate.

    The wider danger to Europe would not end there. It would increase. So we must answer this threat in full.

    At the outset, it is important to be prepared. We do not seek conflict. Our objective is lasting peace, a return to strategic stability, and the rule of law.

    And in the face of these threats, there is only one viable option. 

    Now, to break the convention of a house of speeches, we are not at a crossroads. The road ahead is straight and it is clear.

    We must build our hard power, because that is the currency of the age. We must be able to deter aggression. And yes, if necessary, we must be ready to fight.

    To do whatever it takes to protect our people, our values, and our way of life. And as Europe, we must stand on our own two feet. And that means being bold.

    It means putting away petty politics and short-term concerns. It means acting together to build a stronger Europe and a more European NATO, underpinned by deeper links between the UK and the EU, across defence, industry, tech, politics, and the wider economy. Because these are the foundations on which our security and prosperity will rest.

    This is how we will build a better future for our continent. True to the vibrant, free, diverse societies that we represent, showing that people who look different to each other can live peacefully together. But this isn’t against the tenor of our times.

    Rather, it’s what makes us strong, as we’re prepared to defend it with everything that we have.

    And we are not the Britain of the Brexit years anymore.

    Because we know that in a dangerous world, we would not take control by turning in.  We would surrender. 

    And I won’t let that happen. That’s why I devote time as Prime Minister to Britain’s leadership on the world stage.

    And that’s why I’m here today. Because I am clear, there is no British security without Europe, and no European security without Britain. That is the lesson of history, and is today’s reality as well.

    So together we must rise to this moment. We must spend more, deliver more, and coordinate more.

    And crucially, we must do this with the United States.

    The US remains an indispensable power. Its contribution to European security over 80 years is unparalleled. And so is our gratitude.

    At the same time, we recognise that things are changing. The US National Security Strategy  spells out that Europe must take primary responsibility for its own defence. That is the new law.

    Now, there have been a series of thoughtful interventions about what this means, including the argument that we’re at a moment of rupture. 

    Now, I would agree that the world has changed fundamentally, and that we must find new ways to uphold our values and the rule of law. But in responding to that, we must not disregard everything that has sustained us for the last 80 years.

    That could be a moment of destruction. And instead, I believe, we must make this a moment of creation. Instead of a moment of rupture, we must make it one of radical renewal.

    So, rather than pretending that we can simply replace all US capabilities, we should focus on diversifying and decreasing some dependencies. We should deliver generational investment that moves us from over-dependence to interdependence. I’m talking about a vision of European security and greater European autonomy.

    It does not herald US withdrawal, but answers the call for more burden-sharing in Europe and remake the ties that have served us so well. Because we know the value of our own power. The nature of our power is at the core of human decision.

    It achieved something that leaders have been trying to do for centuries. From Westphalia to the Congress of Vienna to Versailles. After centuries of conflict, the founders of NATO finally united our continents in peace and security.

    Our militaries, that once faced each other on the battlefield, now stand side-by-side, pledged to each other’s defence. It is a shield over our heads every single day. And whilst some on the extremes of our politics chip away at this alliance, we defend it.

    I am proud that my party fought for NATO’s creation. While our then Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin called it a spiritual union of the West. And we’ve shown our fidelity to that idea, asserting each other’s sovereignty, as we did on Greenland.

    And crucially, coming to each other’s aid under Article 5. We fought together in Afghanistan, at terrible cost to many in my country and across many allied countries. And so I say to all NATO members, our commitment to Article 5 is as profound now as ever. And be in no doubt, if called on, the UK would come to your aid today.

    Instead, we must move forward together to create a more European NATO. As I see it, Europe is a sleeping giant. Our economies dwarf Russia more than ten times over.

    We have huge defence capabilities, yet too often this adds up to less than the sum of its parts. Fragmented industrial planning and procurement have led to gaps in some areas, and massive duplication in others. 

    Europe has over 20 types of frigate, and 10 types of fighter jet. We have over 10 types of main battle tank, whilst the US has one. It’s wildly inefficient, and it harms our collective security. The US security umbrella has allowed these bad habits to develop. But now we must break them. 

    And we have shown that we can coordinate in great effect, as was just set out. Supporting Ukraine in a way that Putin never really imagined. Creating the Coalition of the Willing, which now covers almost all of Europe, as well as Canada and our friends in the Asia-Pacific. And going further in our support, with the UK announcing over £500 million this week for more air defence for the Ukrainian people. To meet the wider threat, it is clear that we are going to have to spend more faster. 

    And we have shown our collective intent in this regard as well. With the historic agreement to increase spending to 5% on security and defence. And we are prepared to explore innovative solutions. So we are stepping up work with like-minded allies on options for a collective approach to defence financing, to help accelerate this vital investment.

    And as we increase spending, we must use it to its full potential. We must come together to integrate our capabilities on spending and procurement and build a joint European defence industry. I welcome the steps that we have taken so far, which could allow us to participate in the £90 billion Euro loan to Ukraine.

    I hope we can work together like this going forward. Because, look, the logic of defence is solidarity and collective effort, not market access. 

    In a crisis, our citizens expect us to be ready. So we need to deliver a step change in collaboration. 

    And I am proud of the work we are already doing together. Delivering cutting-edge drones with Ukraine. Developing next-generation long-range missiles with Germany, Italy and France. Working with our JEF allies to protect our northern flank.

    Doubling our deployment of British commandos in the Arctic. Taking control of NATO’s Atlantic and Northern Command in Norfolk, Virginia. And transforming our Royal Navy by striking the biggest warship deal in British history with Norway.

    We are building a fleet of warships to hunt Russian submarines and protect undersea infrastructure. We want to replicate this level of collaboration with other allies across the High North and the Baltics. 

    And I can announce today that the UK will deploy our Carrier Strike Group to the North Atlantic and the High North this year led by HMS Prince of Wales, operating alongside the US, Canada and other NATO allies in a powerful show of our commitment to Euro-Atlantic security.

    That is also why we are enhancing our nuclear cooperation with France. For decades the UK has been the only nuclear power in Europe to commit its deterrent to protect all NATO members. But now any adversary must know that in a crisis they could be confronted by our combined strength.

    It shows beyond doubt how vital it is that we work together. So, we must also look at what more we can do with the EU. 

    We must go beyond the historic steps that we took at last year’s UK-EU summit to build the formidable productive power and innovative strength that we need. British companies already account for over a quarter of the continent’s defence industrial base. 

    They are a job-creating, community-building machine employing around 239,000 people across the UK, including in Wales, where this month we’re launching the first of five regional defence-grade deals.

    We want to bring our leadership in defence, tech and AI together with Europe to multiply our strengths and build a shared industrial base across our continent which could turbocharge our defence production. 

    That requires leadership. To drive greater coherence and coordination across Europe. That is what we’re doing with Germany and France in the E3, working closely with EU partners, particularly Italy and Poland as well as with Norway, Canada and Turkey. 

    So my message today is the United Kingdom is ready. We see the imperative. We see the urgency. We want to work together to lead a generational shift in defence industrial cooperation. 

    Now this includes looking again at closer economic alignment.

    We are already aligned with the single market in some areas to drive down the prices of food and energy. We are trusted partners. And as the Chancellor of the Exchequer said this week, deeper economic integration is in all of our interests.

    So we must look at where we can move closer to the single market in other sectors as well where that would work for both sides. 

    The prize here is greater security. Stronger growth for the United Kingdom and the EU, which will fuel increased defence spending and the chance to place the UK at the centre of a wave of European industrial renewal.

    I understand the politics very well. It will mean trade-offs. But the status quo is not fit for purpose.

    And to me there is no question where the national interest lies. I will always fight for what’s best for my country. 

    I started today talking about avoiding mistakes of the past like delaying action or fragmenting our efforts. 

    But there is something else. In the 1930s, leaders were too slow to level with the public about the fundamental shift in mindset that was required. 

    So we must work harder today to build consent for the decisions we must take to keep us safe. 

    Because if we don’t, the peddlers of easy answers are ready on the extremes of left and right and they will offer their solutions instead. 

    It’s striking that the different ends of the spectrum share so much. Soft on Russia. Weak on NATO. If not outright opposed. And determined to sacrifice the relationship we need on the altar of their ideology.

    The future they offer is one of division and then capitulation. 

    The lamps would go out across Europe once again. But we will not let that happen.

    If we believe in our values, in democracy, liberty and the rule of law. This is the moment to stand up and to fight for them. That is why we must work together.

    And show that by taking responsibility for our own security, we will help our people look forward. Not with fear, but with determination. And with hope.

    Thank you very much.