🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters receive cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development 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 Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members urge calm 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 tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

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 global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:

Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans 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, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- 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 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 minister, she said. She added:

In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.

[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

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

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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