Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including plans to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, 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 the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
