Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (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 declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. 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 American government. I can get in front of us 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
