Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared 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 relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations 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 consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned 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 “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
