Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
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 anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles 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 uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. 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 legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, 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 an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections 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.
