🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

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

The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:

Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

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

[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

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

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.