Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
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 talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
