Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold 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 declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview 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 the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish 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 valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
