Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar 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 Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
In the end 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 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
