Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including plans to cut utility costs. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
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 compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “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 getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda 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 mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders 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: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
