Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on embracing 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 Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union 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 uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press 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 the ongoing situation.
