Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters receive affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, 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 worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification 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 schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby 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.
