Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls 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 standards, 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 declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. 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.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
