Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to reduce 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 strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge 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 UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations 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 key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
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 mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. 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 scheduled 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 expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
