Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister 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 taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she 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 government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative 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 tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
