Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions 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 key partners examining the legal aspect 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 deeply worried 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 declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. 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 make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
