Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to affordable power.
No one in British political life seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. 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 close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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 sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, 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 minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I literally 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 Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments 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 anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
