Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in an article where he referenced measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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 refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
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 statement to MPs about Venezuela.
