Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
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 country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect 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 the Chinese president, 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, she 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
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 expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
