Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution 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 special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round 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, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “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 getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot 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 Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. 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 press.
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 update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
