Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, 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 parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, 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 violated international law 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 juridical rationale 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 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, 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 different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] 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 agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments 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 update to MPs about Venezuela.
