Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case recently in an article where he cited measures including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, 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 antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former 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.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. 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 an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I literally 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 Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
