Welcome back. Before Christmas, 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 case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations 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 key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want 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 proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, 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 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: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
