Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. 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 not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally 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 Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am 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 scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
