Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law 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 doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- 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.
Asked about Starmer refusing 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 went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. 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 speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
