🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in a piece where he cited measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring supporters receive affordable power.

No one in British political life appears particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

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

The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:

Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.

[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of 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 speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

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

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.