Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 breach of international law, Thornberry 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 added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders 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 make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office 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 statement to MPs about Venezuela.
