Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in British political life appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar 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 afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions 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 recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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.
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 different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
