Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor 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 US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, 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, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (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.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally 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 speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
