🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including plans to cut utility costs. However, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing his voters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.

But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with American interests, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has declined to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

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

The Union reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets 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.

The migration minister, was conducting 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 afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Absolutely not. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also talking with close allies examining the legal aspect 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 area of control.

Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. 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 escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.

[Starmer] may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the party heads are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to make comments to the media.

11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a lobby briefing.

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

After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, is anticipated to give a update to MPs about the ongoing situation.