Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent 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 UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, 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:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, 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 visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
