Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
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 install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview 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 the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
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 “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the justification 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: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
