Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, 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 declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she 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 added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister 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 valid excuse.
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 talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
