Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion 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 anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, 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 upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin 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 violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby 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 the ongoing situation.
