Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way 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 US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused 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 except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, 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 refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. 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 an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to 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 Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
