Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce utility costs. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing 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 regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding 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 crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. 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 conducting 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, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, 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 getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear 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 valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press 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.
