Government Official Dismisses Claims of Declining to Call Venezuelan Leader Extradition Illegal to Placate US President.

Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight ministers' actions to reduce the cost of living. He outlined this argument yesterday in an article where he referenced measures including plans to reduce energy bills. Unfortunately, his economic media push has been overshadowed of the headlines by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

Not a single figure in British political life seems particularly eager 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 willing to say about the American action to abduct Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in relation to the country’s oil industry.

Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the US action, and the administration has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, European Union members apart from Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union urge calm and caution by all actors, to prevent a worsening 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 United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition violated global statutes because he was worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:

Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the Americans. And it’s for the United States to explain the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former 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 sphere of influence.

Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry 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:

Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister 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 proper justification.

Here is the schedule for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. 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 media.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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