Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, 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 are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation 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.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification 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: John Swinney, 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: Keir Starmer is on a tour 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: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
