Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned 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 an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – 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 Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at 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 the Russian leader 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 office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position 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 want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda 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 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit 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: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
