Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles 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 pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby 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.
