Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one 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 under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting 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, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain 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 interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally 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 Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour 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 queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
