Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN 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 conducting an series of media appearances 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 replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension 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 the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, 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 minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule 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 1pm in turn. 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: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
