Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' efforts to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration 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 restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. 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 looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance 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 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 global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer 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: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.
