Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
No one in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – 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 Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, 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 escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
