🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.

No one in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse 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 resolution to the crisis.

The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. 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 an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the justification 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 agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.

11.30am: Downing Street 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.