Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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 refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, 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 added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up 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: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
