🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration 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 caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles 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 defend those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.

Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes 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 United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.

Questioned 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 “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

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

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 talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

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

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