Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor 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 US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend 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 violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- 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.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
