🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing 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 Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

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

Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (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 declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.

The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification 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 schedule for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the press.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.