Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
No one in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, 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, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at 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 deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “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 escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads 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 queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
