Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push 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 appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law 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 conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I literally 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 speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. 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 media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
