Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, 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 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 reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer 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: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
