🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case yesterday in a piece where he referenced steps including proposals to reduce utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct approach to ensuring supporters get access to affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life appears very keen on embracing the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members apart from one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

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

The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

The migration minister, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke international law because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:

Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.

Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of global rules, she said, because the PM was in office, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She went on:

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

The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the agenda for the day.

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

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

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

2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.

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