Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister 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 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 appearance 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 violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street 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 Venezuela.
