🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this argument recently in an article where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, his economic media push has been blown out of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was doing an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Maduro extradition violated international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an interview 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

In the end there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.

[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.

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 Venezuela.