Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
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 “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning 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 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 statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
