Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent 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 refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions 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 key partners looking at 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
