Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union 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 defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting 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, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions 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 key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin 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 breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot 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 mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
