Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
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 replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, 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:
Ultimately 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 American government. I can state before us 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
