Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days 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 steps including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
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 install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. 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 close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote 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 lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
