Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently 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 news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
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 defend 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 worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
