Government Official Rejects Claims of Declining to Label Venezuelan Leader Extradition Unlawful to Appease Trump.

Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government actions to reduce the living expenses. He set out this case recently in an article where he referenced measures including plans to cut energy bills. However, his economic PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

No one in mainstream UK politics appears very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for Norway.

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

Keir Starmer has refused to censure the US action, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did emphasise the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:

The European Union call for restraint and restraint by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.

The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to defend those standards, as a cornerstone of the international security architecture.

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

Not at all. The British government 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 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 deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in office, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:

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

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

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and lunchtime respectively. All the party heads are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.

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

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 update to MPs about the ongoing situation.