Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid 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 United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance 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 refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, 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 reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I cannot 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
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 anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
