Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he cited steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting 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 worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
