Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news 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 expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, 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 government member, she said. She added:
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 state before us 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
