Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
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, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone 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 broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance 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 China’s Xi Jinping, 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 office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister 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 proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
