🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law 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 pillar of the international security architecture.

Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round 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, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.

But recently, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

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

The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the press.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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