Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU 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 particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect 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 very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to 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: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads 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 speak to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
