🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had intended to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case yesterday in an article where he cited measures including proposals to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it considered what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

EU members urge restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles 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 uphold those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

The migration minister, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in discussions 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 talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:

Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is not a legal action.

The Prime Minister may well wish to hear 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 valid excuse.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and lunchtime respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

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

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