Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development 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 replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. 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 conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
