Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he cited measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears 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 prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the government 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 overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing 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 afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. 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 legal aspect 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 very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
