Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda 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 appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be 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 talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, 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 added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
