Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- 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 area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit 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: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
