Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including plans to cut utility costs. However, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone 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 broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the reasoning 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory 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 media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby 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.
