Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate 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 expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
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 anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
