Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. 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 speak to the press.
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 anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
