🔗 Share this article

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to focus on government actions to bring down the cost of living. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. However, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed 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 particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is likely good news for other nations.

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 install a successor with someone anticipated to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has refused to censure the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it considered what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of global rules, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

EU members call for calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The Union recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the UN Charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those principles, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, 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 upsetting Trump, the minister replied:

Not at all. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the United States to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve undertaken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the juridical dimension 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 the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation 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 escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. 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: John Swinney, 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 leaders are gearing up to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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