Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to reduce utility costs. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion 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, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, 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.
Mike Tapp, 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 upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, 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 the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “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 escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want 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 valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
