🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.

No one in mainstream UK politics seems 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 the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance 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 avoid a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:

Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

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

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

[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. 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: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.

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

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

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