Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold 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 Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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 sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, 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:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot 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 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead 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 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 anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
