Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
