Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct 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.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone 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 broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions 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 close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former 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.
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 balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
