🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except Hungary 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 restraint and restraint by all parties, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the situation.

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

Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:

Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry 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 government member, she said. She went on:

Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.

[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning 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: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit 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 questions in the Commons.

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