🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.

No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 sphere of influence.

Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:

In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well wish 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 agenda for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.

11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.

2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.