Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in an article where he cited steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.
[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments 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 anticipated to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
