🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing his voters get access to cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely a positive development for other nations.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

The migration minister, 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 antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting 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 area of control.

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 “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

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

The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote 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 questions in the Commons.

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