🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

No one in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing 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 extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution 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 uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.

But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.

[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.