🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.

But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

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 legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies 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 the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, 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, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, 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 went on:

In the end there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.

[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up 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: 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.