Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. 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 interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office 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 update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
