Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
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 lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, 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 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 declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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 refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, 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 went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of 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 Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour 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: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
