Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he cited measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – 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 Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone 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 global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, 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 the Russian leader 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, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear 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 schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due 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: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
