Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news 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 install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN 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.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
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 separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit 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: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
