Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners 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 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 violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone 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 Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
