Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. However, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. 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 implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls 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 particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
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 worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
