Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged 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 inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility 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 refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. 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 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally 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 Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
