Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets 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 uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
