Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way 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 anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
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 lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. 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: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
