🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive 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 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 American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

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

The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, the minister replied:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former 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 sphere of influence.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the reasoning 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: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.

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

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

After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.