Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news 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 the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister 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 valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech 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 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: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
