🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He set out this argument yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.

No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably 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 extradite Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has declined to censure the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union urge calm and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold 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 refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:

Not at all. 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 steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But recently, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned 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.

Asked about Starmer declining 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 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 listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. 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: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and lunchtime in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due 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 the ongoing situation.