🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' efforts to reduce the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including plans to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union urge restraint and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of the rules-based order 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 international security architecture.

The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of upsetting Trump, the minister responded:

Not at all. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting 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 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.

Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation 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 went on:

Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well want to listen to 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 valid excuse.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

2.30pm: The home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.