Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law 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 series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain 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 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry 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 not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Tory 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 tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
