Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances 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, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry 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 added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office 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.
