Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp 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 juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she 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 government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before 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 speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
