Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned 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 recently in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at 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 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 international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders 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 press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
