🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters get access to cheap energy.

No one in British political life seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets 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 standards, as a pillar of the international security architecture.

Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she 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 went on:

Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm 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 due to speak to the press.

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

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

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