🔗 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 government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he cited measures including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

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

The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:

Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect 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.

Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach 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 wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

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

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak 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 update to MPs about Venezuela.