Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he cited measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out 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 appearance 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 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, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
