Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting 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 worried of antagonising 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 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 appearance 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin 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 weigh up “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 escaping the fact. 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 proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am 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 scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby 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 Venezuela.
