Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
