Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
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, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “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 an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
