Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided 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 overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak 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: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
