Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct 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 criticise the American intervention, 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 international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles 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 uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview 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 the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
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 different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
