Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing 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 probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing 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, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- 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 declining to say that Trump was in breach 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:
In the end 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 everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
