🔗 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 ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.

No one in British political life appears very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The EU recalls 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 special duty to uphold 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 Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. 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 looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an appearance 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 China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

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

Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

[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 cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, 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 scheduled 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: Yvette Cooper, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.