🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. However, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is likely a positive development for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, especially in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, 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 inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

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

Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the legal aspect 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.

Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.

The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer 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: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.