Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar 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 worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain 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 key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, 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 the Chinese president, 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 government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
