Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at 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 very concerned 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.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office 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 the ongoing situation.
