Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
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 a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 violation of international law, she 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 minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of us 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
