Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely 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 extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, 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 the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
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 expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
