Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably good news 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 Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
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. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, 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 violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis 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 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she 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 minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning 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 mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
