🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader 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 steps including proposals to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the headlines by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

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

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Last night, all EU states apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union call for calm and caution by all actors, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the UN Charter must be respected. 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 interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was worried of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the legal aspect of this.

But recently, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (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 refusing to say that Trump was in violation of international law, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to weigh up “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

In the end there is no escaping the fact. This is not a legal action.

[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the US administration. I can state before everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving talks, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister 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 press briefing.

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

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