Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably 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 cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing 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, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain 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 close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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.
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 “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech 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: The Prime Minister 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: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
