🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in an article where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.

No one in British political life seems very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.

But there is a heated discussion 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 expected to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did emphasise the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, the minister replied:

Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect of this.

But last night, in an interview 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 the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, 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.

The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and lunchtime in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

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

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

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

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