🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely good news 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 replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding 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, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members call for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:

Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin 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 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 government member, she said. She went on:

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

The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

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

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

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

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