Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, 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 went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
