Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen 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 prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined 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 Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles 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 standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking 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 the Russian leader 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 breach 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. 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 cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. 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 due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
