🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited steps including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.

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 replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has declined to censure 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 stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:

Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an appearance 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.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, Thornberry 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 minister, she said. She went on:

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

The Prime Minister may well want to hear 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 valid excuse.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.

11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.

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

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