Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated 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 administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, 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 the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street 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 Venezuela.
