Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he cited steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting 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 worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview 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 the Russian leader 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 breach of global rules, 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 minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press 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.
