Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, 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 the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. 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 an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I cannot 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 speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote 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 press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
