Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, 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 defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting 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, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain 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 last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, 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:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. 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 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 lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer 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: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
