Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility 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 declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at 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 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 violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately 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 us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
