Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged 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 explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “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 getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. 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 press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
