Government Official Rejects Allegations of Declining to Call Maduro Removal Illegal to Placate Trump.

Welcome back. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this argument recently in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his distinct strategy to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.

No one in British political life appears particularly eager on embracing the American method – which is probably a positive development for other nations.

But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite Nicolás Maduro, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, especially in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.

Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the value of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

EU members call for restraint and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the situation.

The EU reiterates that, under all circumstances, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.

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 worried of upsetting Trump, Tapp responded:

Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners looking at the legal aspect of this.

But last night, in an appearance 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 the Russian leader 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 government, he had to weigh up “a number of considerations”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She added:

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

[Starmer] may well want to hear what the justification is from the American government. I can get in front of us 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 Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: The Prime Minister is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

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

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