Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he cited steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise 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 Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, 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 antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance 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 the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned 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 “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. 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 due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
