🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.

No one in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.

But there is an intense debate 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 expected to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.

But last night, in an appearance 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin 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 violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:

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

The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

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

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

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

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