Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
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 replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility 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 Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, 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 the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked 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 “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
