Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. 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:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (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.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
