Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, 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 refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. 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 steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at 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 China’s Xi Jinping, 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, 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:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the justification 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
