🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate under way 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 US demands, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. 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 refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

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

[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders 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: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.

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

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