Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, 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 principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, 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 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 violation of international law, she 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 government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally 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 speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
