Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring 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 recalls 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 defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
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 worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “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 not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
