Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, 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 declined to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, 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 pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, 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 afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, 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:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders 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 speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
