Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, 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 upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps 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, 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, 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 minister, 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 justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
