Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting 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 Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls 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 special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she 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 went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
