Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on adopting 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 prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking 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 ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 area of control.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
