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 reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news 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 abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
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 international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions 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 talking 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 ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she 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 minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
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 speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
