Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members except 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:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone 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 broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining 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 sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
