Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he cited steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news 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 install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, 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 declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, 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 the Russian leader 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 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 separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
