Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing 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 different position because she was not a minister, 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 wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. 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 scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
