Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. 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 get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles 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 principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. 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 close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation 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 separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
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 American government. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
