Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen 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 anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged 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 overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government 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 ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. 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 press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
