Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, 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 upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out 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, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former 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 declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “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 getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want 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 valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer 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: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
