Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he cited steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen 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 Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members 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:
EU members call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining 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 very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour 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: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.