Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. 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 action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification 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 Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up 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: Downing Street 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 the ongoing situation.
