Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
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 global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation 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 minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office 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 Venezuela.
