Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from 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 call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone 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 antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. 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 action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to hear 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 proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory 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: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
