🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to cut utility costs. However, his cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different 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 good news for other nations.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members call for calm and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

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

The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:

Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:

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

[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the media.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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