Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development 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 replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise 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 Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone 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:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining 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 area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining 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 minister, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled 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.
