🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.

No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union urge calm and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. 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 international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at 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 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 sphere of influence.

Questioned 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 different position 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 hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

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

11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby 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.