🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters receive affordable power.

No one in British political life appears very keen on adopting 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 prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has declined to criticise 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 Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, 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 worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

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

But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

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 balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

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

[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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