Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government 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 recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “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 listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. 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 scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
