Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably 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 extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. 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 refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal 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 Americans. 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 examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby 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 Venezuela.
