Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
