Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the legal aspect 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she 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 minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister 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: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
