Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. 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.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
