🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.

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 ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to 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 lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:

Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.

But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 sphere of influence.

Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

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 reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections 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: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.