Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely 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 abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- 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 area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing 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 different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning 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 agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak 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: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
