Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced steps including plans to reduce utility costs. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp 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 legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. 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 an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish 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 valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
