🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.

But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. 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 not a legal action.

[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.

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

Morning: Keir Starmer 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 questions in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.