Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, 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 office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
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 lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister 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 press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
