Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager 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 prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining 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 very concerned 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 violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
