Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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 sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she 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 minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer 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 press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
