Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems 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 the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend 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 violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, 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 minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately 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 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
