Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he cited steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- 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 refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, 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 not a legal action.
[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 agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.
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 the ongoing situation.
