Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
