Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
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 US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, 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:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish 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: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. 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 scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
