Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.
No one in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.
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 lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
The European Union call for restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent 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 upsetting Trump, the minister replied:
Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.
But last night, 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, 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.
The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
