🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he cited measures including proposals to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters receive affordable power.

Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics appears particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably good news for other nations.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and install a successor with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union urge restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

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

Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried 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 violation 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 different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:

Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well wish to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before everyone 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 opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

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

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

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

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