Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to cut utility costs. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision 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.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale 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 appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader 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 office, 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 getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative 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: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
