Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. 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 steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview 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 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, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation 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 wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
