AS the civilised world watches with dismay as Venezuela descends into a dystopian nightmare of despotism, corruption and poverty, one usually very vocal supporter of the South American nation's regime seems to have developed a touch of laryngitis.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, one of Venezuela's greatest cheerleaders, suddenly finds himself with precious little to say about the plight in which this oil-rich country finds itself.

Rampant inflation, distressing poverty, rigged elections and violence and death on the streets are there for all to see. This is a time for global condemnation of the actions of president Nicolas Maduro and his henchmen.

It has been distressing to read some of the first-hand accounts of life in this once-proud nation, which has been brought to its knees by the socialist regimes of recent years. Children competing with dogs over scraps from bins; desperately ill people unable to get medical treatment; and savage reprisals for dissidence were all widely reported in the national and international media last week. And, no, it isn't "fake news". The United Nations this week condemned the "excessive force" being used by government forces to quell protests abut the crisis.

At the same time, the British-based firm which provided the technology for the Venezuelan general election went on record last week to state with absolute conviction that the equipment had been tampered with. The result of this dodgy election is that Maduro's governing party now has almost unlimited power and control over this benighted country.

Venezuela is fast on the way to becoming a pariah state, but it is a mistake to place the blame for the violence, poverty and corruption entirely at the feet of Mr Maduro. The country's journey into the abyss began long before Maduro came to power. Under Hugo Chavez - a man accorded near godlike status domestically and among the far left here - Venezuela was already in economic decline thanks to its misplaced confidence and over-reliance on oil revenues (a bit like Scotland) and thanks to a leader with distinct feet of clay.

While his legacy is one of a poverty-stricken and desperate nation, Chavez's daughter is reportedly sitting on a personal fortune of some four billion dollars; and it doesn't take a political genius to detect the whiff of corruption and misuse of public funds.

With Chavez gone and the hardline Maduro now ruthlessly in control and overseeing the country's rapid descent into chaos, it is absolutely right that those hitherto most vocal supporters of the Venezuelan model of governance - most high profile of all being our own Mr Corbyn - should be called upon to explain their positions.

Here was Mr Corbyn this week, when asked whether he condemned the actions of Mr Maduro, whose government forces are universally acknowledged to be behind the deaths and violence: "What I condemn is the violence that's been done by any side, by all sides, in all this." He went on to praise the "effective and serious attempts at reducing poverty in Venezuela, improving literacy and improving the lives of many of the poorest people." I'm sure the people scavenging in bins on the streets of Caracas will find much comfort from Mr Corbyn's assessment of the situation.

As Venezuela becomes one of the most illiberal of countries, with human rights abuses and state corruption abounding, it is difficult, if not impossible, to argue the case for the socialist dream which the country under successive regimes has pursued. The dream has clearly become a waking nightmare for millions of people. Judging by his comments this week, Mr Corbyn, however, appears to be determined to keep his own eyes (and, indeed, mind) firmly closed on the matter.

AND we're off! The nonsense news of silly season hit its stride this week with a front page lead in The Telegraph, whose headline trumpeted this: Set young children free online 'to save the country'.

The crux of the story is that Robert Hannigan, the former head of GCHQ, believes children should spend more - not less - of their summer holidays glued to their smartphones and gaming consoles, as the more time they spend mastering their online and virtual skills, the better it will be for the digital future of the country.

Really? So 13-year-old self-obsessed girls posting inappropriate selfies of themselves all over social media is going to give Britain the edge in the future is it? I can't see it myself. Nor can I imagine how raising a generation of monosyllabic slobs with no social skills but the ability to get to level 87 of Grand Theft Auto is going to enhance our standing on the global stage.

Tech skills are important for the future, of course. But so are communication skills, and an ability to interact with the real world. I fail to see how spending 30 hours a week glued to Instagram or a games console is going to do much to equip today's young people with the skills they need for tomorrow.

Children's summer holidays should be about playing out, exploring places and getting healthily tired from plenty of fresh air, not stuck in front of a digital device. Mr Hannigan may have been the country's spymaster - but in this instance he's talking a load of old tosh.

THE National Trust does some pretty good things for the country, on the whole. We like it here in Cumbria because of its connection with our famous daughter Beatrix Potter; and who could not want to see the preservation of our great estates for future generations?

But, like many organisations that get a bit above themselves, the National Trust is also capable of some daft decisions. Recently, the trust has got itself into hot water over its insistence that its staff (many of whom are volunteers) wear gay pride badges, in order to celebrate 50 years since the decriminalisation of homosexuality.

Such unnecessary virtue-signalling has backfired on the trust, with its somewhat dogmatic insistence on the wearing of the badges being viewed - not entirely surprisingly - as being somewhat illiberal. Dissident National Trust workers who didn't want to wear the badges were, apparently, offered the option to take on "other duties" instead.

The upshot of all this, of course, is that in trying to make a virtue of its tolerance, the National Trust has managed to make itself look rather intolerant. Still, as they say, there's no such thing as bad publicity...