Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
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 cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
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, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid 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 United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, 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 broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action 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, Emily Thornberry (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 sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
