Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles 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 principles, 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 violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
