Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he cited steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies 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 the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, 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 listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister 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 queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
