🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.

But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview 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 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 violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, 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 getting away from it. This is not a legal action.

The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled 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 expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.