🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.

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 anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

EU members urge calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets 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 uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was conducting 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 afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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 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 balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:

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

The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit 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: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.