Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager 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 Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent 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 doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
