Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
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, the minister replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, 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 getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
