🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he cited measures including plans to cut utility costs. However, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.

Not a single figure in British political life seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members urge restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:

Absolutely not. The British government 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 taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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 refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:

In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.

[Starmer] may well wish to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the agenda 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 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer 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 queries in the Commons.

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