🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including proposals to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters receive cheap energy.

No one in British political life seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – 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 replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it considered 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 global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at 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 very concerned 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 area of control.

Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, she 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 getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us 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 address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

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

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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