Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems 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 willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer 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, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 violation of global rules, Thornberry 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 minister, she said. She added:
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 US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are gearing up 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 update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
