🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate ongoing 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 US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered 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 suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members call for restraint and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.

Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:

Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining 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 deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. 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 want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.

11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.

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

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.