Early evening summary
Ministers have resisted calls from some opposition parties, and from some Labour MPs, who want the government to denounce the US raid on Venezuela leading to the capture of its president, Nicolás Maduro, or to declare it a breach of international law. Instead, while stressing their support for international law in principle, they have not said anything overtly critical of Donald Trump. (See 10.28am and 1.01pm) Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, will shortly give a statement to MPs on the subject. Some Labour MPs, mostly from the left of the party, have said Starmer should be more outspoken. One of them, Steve Witherden, said:
With a textbook case of American gangsterism, President Trump has brought back gunboat diplomacy. Colombia, Cuba, Greenland, Panama, it is anybody’s guess who might be next.
The government’s response has been insufficient. The post-war order is in tatters, our foreign policy assumptions are outdated, and we need to realign.
The only serious response is to pursue the closest possible relationship with our European neighbours. I would like the prime minister to say so.
Starmer says government considering further help for pubs to help them deal with increasing business rate costs
As Kiran Stacey and Raphael Boyd reported before Christmas, some Labour MPs have been banned from their local pubs because publicans are so angry about the impact the budget will have on the hospitality sector. They report:
After a difficult few years in which pubs have been hit by high costs, the pandemic and the impact of younger people going out less, publicans were optimistic this budget might bring some relief – specifically with a long-promised revamp of business rates.
But the chancellor poured cold water on those hopes, choosing instead to reduce headline rates and commit £4.3bn over three years in financial support for the retail and hospitality industries.
It may have seemed a gesture of goodwill, but the value of that support package has been dwarfed by the impact of a three-yearly property revaluation that has caused the taxable value of pubs and restaurants to spike from their Covid-affected lows.
Starting from next April, rates will rise by 115% for the average hotel and 76% for a pub, compared with 4% for large supermarkets and 7% for distribution warehouses. Whitbread, which owns pubs, restaurants and the Premier Inn hotel chain, says it will have to pay between £40m and £50m in tax as a result.
In an interview with LBC today, asked if there would by any extra help for pubs, Keir Starmer said this was being considered. He explained:
With business rates, obviously, what’s happened is there were reductions in place during Covid which were always going to be unwound at some point.
The overall rates are going to be lower, but I accept that because of re-evaluation, that means that some will have their bills going up.
We’re putting in place transitional relief. We’re talking to the sector, particularly hospitality and pubs, about what further support we can put in, whether that’s licencing freedoms or other measures. We want to talk to the sector. I want to keep working with them to make sure we can work this through.
Britons disapprove of US raid on Venezuela to capture Maduro by more than 2 to 1, poll suggests
YouGov has released polling suggesting that Britons disapprove of the US rendition of Nicolás Maduro, by a margin of more than two to one. Some 51% disapprove either completely (34%) or somewhat (17%), and only 21% of people approve either completely (8%) or somewhat (13%).
But voters are much more split over whether the government should condemn the US operation (32%) or neither praise nor condemn it (34%), suggesting that there is more public support for Keir Starmer’s equivocation (see 10.28am and 1.01pm) than some of the comments from critics imply.
Updated
Peers defeat government on Chagos Islands bill as they vote to stop payments to Mauritius if UK can no longer use Diego Garcia
Peers have inflicted their first defeat against the government over the controversial UK handover of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, PA Media reports. PA says:
The House of Lords backed by 132 votes to 124 – a majority of 8 – a demand led by former military chiefs that payments linked to the contentious transfer deal would cease if the military base on Diego Garcia could no longer be used.
The UK has agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120m annually during the 99-year agreement to lease back the site, a total cost in cash terms of at least £13bn.
The government, however, estimates the bill will be lower at around £101m a year while critics argue it will be much higher.
Updated
The UN security council is not voting on a resolution relating to Venezuela today. The government is still not saying what it will do if there is a vote on a resolution critical of the US action in the future, although it has hinted it would not support such a move. (See 1.01pm.)
UK committed to rule of law, but Maduro's claim to power was 'fraudulent', deputy ambassador tells UN
At the United Nations security council, James Kariuki, the UK’s deputy ambassador to the UN, has just delivered a short speech in a debate on Venezuela. He was not critical of the US intervention, and he suggested that Nicolás Maduro was to blame for his own fate.
But he did confirm that the UK remains committed to the rule of law.
He said:
The Venezuelan people have suffered for years.
This council now meets at a pivotal moment for Venezuela’s future.
Maduro’s actions created extreme levels of poverty, violent repression and failing basic services. His regime’s rule precipitated a displacement crisis affecting the whole region. The United Kingdom has long been clear that Maduro’s claim to power was fraudulent. To date, Venezuela’s national electoral council has failed to publish the full results of the July 2024 presidential elections and independent domestic and international reports also observed significant irregularities and a lack of transparency.
The United Kingdom wants to see a safe and peaceful transition to a legitimate government that reflects the will of the Venezuelan people. They deserve a government with which reflects their vote at the ballot box and delivers a more stable, prosperous future for all Venezuelans.
Finally, the United Kingdom reaffirms its commitment to international law and the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. These foundations are essential for maintaining global peace, security and the rule of law.
Lib Dems call for release of internal government advice about legality of US seizure of Maduro
The Liberal Democrats are calling for the release of any internal government legal advice about the legality of the American operation that led to the seizure of Nicolás Maduro, president of Venezuela until he was flown to the US in handcuffs on Saturday. This is from Calum Miller, the Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesperson.
Trump’s interventions in Venezuela are surely in violation of international law – yet our tight-lipped prime minister is refusing to call that out.
Rather than give the British public the information they deserve about such a brazen attack by the president of the United States, Downing Street is giving him cover by pleading the fifth. That’s the wrong approach.
The government must release any legal advice they hold on whether or not President Trump has broken international law. If he has, the British people deserve to know.
In fact, as Geraldine McElvie writes in this explainer, it is already fairly obvious, to voters who are curious about this, whether or not the raid was legal.
Geraldine says:
The experts the Guardian spoke to agreed that the US is likely to have violated the terms of the UN charter, which was signed in October 1945 and designed to prevent another conflict on the scale of the second world war. A central provision of this agreement – known as article 2(4) – rules that states must refrain from using military force against other countries and must respect their sovereignty.
Geoffrey Robertson KC, a founding head of Doughty Street Chambers and a former president of the UN war crimes court in Sierra Leone, said the attack on Venezuela was contrary to article 2(4) of the charter. “The reality is that America is in breach of the United Nations charter,” he added. “It has committed the crime of aggression, which the court at Nuremberg described as the supreme crime, it’s the worst crime of all.”
Elvira Domínguez-Redondo, a professor of international law at Kingston University, described the operation as a “crime of aggression and unlawful use of force against another country”. Susan Breau, a professor of international law and a senior associate research fellow at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, agreed that the attack could have only been considered lawful if the US had a resolution from the UN security council or was acting in self-defence. “There is just no evidence whatsoever on either of those fronts,” Breau said.
Updated
Zack Polanski describes Starmer's support for international law as 'hollow'
Zack Polanski, the Green party leader, has said suggested that Keir Starmer cannot claim to be a genuine supporter of international law.
Commenting on a clip of Starmer dodging a question about whether the US rendition of Nicolás Maduro was in breach of international law, Polanski said:
The more Starmer insists he’s “long been an advocate for international law”, the more hollow it sounds.
This isn’t ignorance. It’s a choice - made with eyes wide open.
Anas Sarwar tells Scots Holyrood elections shouldn't be about 'how much you like or dislike UK government'
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, has urged Scots not to treat this year’s Holyrood elections as a referendum on the UK government.
In a speech this morning, he said that he knew Scottish people were “angry, frustrated and impatient with the pace of change at Westminster”. He went on:
I do believe that no Labour government at Westminster, however well intentioned, principled or capable, could have undone the damage of two decades in just two years.
The UK Labour government has many meaningful achievements which they need to shout louder about, but it is also fair to say that they haven’t got everything right.
And there are many challenges they still must confront.
I get it. I don’t just see it. I feel it across Scotland.
I know the prime minister and the UK Labour government are not popular with the public right now.
So, I am not running to be Scotland’s first minister in denial of that truth. I am running to be Scotland’s first minister in defiance of it.
Sarwar said he had a message for his fellow Scots.
In four months you can decide a different, bigger and more important question than how much you like or dislike the UK government.
In four months you will choose who leads Scotland’s government.
Arguing the case for Labour, he focused on four policy areas,
Scotland’s choice between the SNP’s record of failure on the NHS, or my plan to clear the backlogs, end the 8am rush for a GP appointment and make our NHS fit for the future.
Scotland’s choice between the SNP’s record of falling standards in our schools, or my plan to back teachers, make schools safe and guarantee opportunity for every young person with 9,000 more apprenticeships.
Scotland’s choice between the housing emergency created by the SNP, or my plan to end rough sleeping and build the homes Scotland needs.
Scotland’s choice between the SNP’s soft touch on crime, or my plan to build safe communities with at least 360 officers returned to the frontline in our neighbourhoods.
Sarwar also said Scottish Labour already had £1m to spend on its campaign, and he said it would be “unleashing the most sophisticated and largest digital operation of any party in Scotland, reaching one million Scots every week”.
In a post on social media, Paul Hutcheon from the Daily Record points out that there was no Labour branding on the banner behind Sarwar when he was speaking.
Updated
Ben Wallace, the former Tory defence secretary, has said that the government should stop equivocating about whether or not it supports the US arrest of Nicolás Maduro. He says:
Whatever the UK government thinks it needs to be clear about it. They can support Trump’s actions or they can condemn it. But clucking around like headless chickens damages UK deeply. No leadership, no principles and no ideas.
Starmer accuses Farage of 'peddling falsehoods' about Brexit
Keir Starmer has accused Nigel Farage of “peddling falsehoods” about Brexit.
In an interview this morning with GB News, which is more pro-Brexit than any mainstream UK broadcaster and which has a lot of pro-Brexit viewers, Starmer said:
My message would be that Nigel Farage says a lot of things that aren’t true and don’t come to fruition.
So he stood in front of your viewers in the Brexit referendum and said, ‘If we leave the EU, migration will come down.’ Well, it didn’t come down. It quadrupled, the Boris Johnson wave.
He said, ‘If we leave the EU, you’d have £350m a week for the NHS.’ That didn’t turn out to be the case.
And he said, ‘If we left the EU, we’d cut lots of red tape.’ Try telling that to anyone who is dealing and doing business with the EU.
So what you get with Nigel Farage is a lot of slippery things that are said, but when you hold them up to the light, they’re not actually true, and peddling falsehoods is no way to solve the problems of this country.
In fact, Starmer is wrong on his second point. The claim that leaving the EU would save an extra £350m a week that could be spent on the NHS came from the Vote Leave campaign, run by Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Dominic Cummings, not from Farage. After the campaign was over, Farage said he did not agree with that claim and that he regarded it as a mistake.
The Brexit referendum took place 10 years ago this summer. But Starmer is talking about it because, after not wanting to discuss the flaws with Brexit for several years (Labour did not want to alienate the leave supporters it needed ahead of the 2024 election), Starmer is now increasingly willing to highlight the problems caused by the policy, and the dishonest claims made by those campaigning for it in 2016.
He has also become increasingly keen to find ways of undermining Farage’s popularity given Reform UK’s persistent lead in the polls. Yesterday More in Common published an MRP poll suggesting, if an election were held now, Farage would be PM with a majority of 112.
Kemi Badenoch says on social media she will be in the Commons this afternoon to respond to the Yvette Cooper statement on Venezuela on behalf of the Conservatives.
She also claims (without explaining why) that the incident show Starmer is not respected abroad.
The events in Venezuela have shown that the Prime Minister is on the outside looking in, not respected abroad or at home.
I will be in Parliament later today to ask what Starmer’s foreign policy strategy is in light of the US’s actions.
He should be telling us himself.
In her interview on ITV’s Good Morning Britain this morning, Badenoch claimed that that fact that Starmer was not consulted by Donald Trump ahead of the arrest of Nicolás Maduro showed that Starmer lacked influence.
(In practice, it is hard to see why Starmer would or should have been consulted.)
Swinney says he 'cannot see' how Maduro arrest complied with international law
John Swinney, Scotland’s first minister, has said he does think the US arrest of Nicolás Maduro was a breach of international law.
Speaking at the SNP event in Glasgow this morning, Swinney said:
I am deeply concerned at the situation which has unfolded in Venezuela.
There is no doubt that the Maduro regime was an illegitimate and authoritarian regime.
However, I am clear that all nations must abide by the international, rules-based system.
Having listened carefully to what has been said by the United States administration in recent days, I cannot see how international law has been respected here.
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, has welcomed Keir Starmer’s comments about Greenland. (See 12pm.) He posted this response on social media.
About time.
Let’s hope this is the start of Keir Starmer standing up for Britain and our allies when it really matters.
Do MPs have any real influence over foreign policy?
A reader asks:
What realistic control does parliament have over foreign policy? Does it have any at all?
I know parliament now votes on war but that’s only a convention not a law. What about everything else? Treaties are a power reserved for the prime minister but can parliament affect their contents in any meaningful way? Is foreign policy democratically accountable?
Good question. And broadly you are right. Much foreign policy does not involve legislation, but does involve the exercise of prerogative powers (where ministers can take decisions at will on the grounds that they are acting on behalf of the king). Keir Starmer did propose before the election legislating to ensure that MPs would always have a vote on going to war, but that seems less of a priority now. MPs do vote on treaties, under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (Crag). But, even here, their powers are limited; they can’t rewrite treaties, only delay their implementation a bit.
But it would be a mistake to assume this means prime ministers can do what they want in foreign policy. As ever, they are constrained to an extent by what their MPs and ministers will tolerate. Of the 10 post-war prime ministers who left office not because of an election defeat but for another reason, half of them were forced out largely or in part because of foreign policy. They were: Eden (Suez), Thatcher (Europe), Blair (Gaza – Labour MPs thought he was too supportive of Israel in the 2006 conflict), Cameron (Brexit) and May (Brexit).
The latest episode of our Politics Weekly UK podcast is out. Pippa Crerar and Kiran Stacey are discussing Keir Starmer’s reticence when it comes to criticising Donald Trump’s flouting of international law.
The Commons statement from Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, won’t start until around 5.30pm. That is because there will be three urgent questions first.
3.30pm: Victoria Atkins, the shadow environment secretary, asks a UQ on the farm inheritance tax U-turn announced just before Christmas.
Around 4.15pm: Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, asks a UQ on the two dangerous offenders absconding from HMP Leyhill on New Year’s Day.
Around 5pm: James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, asks a UQ on the Northern Ireland Troubles bill.
No 10 suggests UK would not vote for UN security council resolution condemning US arrest of Maduro
The Downing Street lobby briefing was mostly taken up with questions about Venezuela. Here are the main points.
The PM’s spokesperson did not contest the Times report claiming that, if the UN security council votes on a resolution criticising the US intervention in Venezuela, the UK will abstain. (See 12.11pm.) The spokesperson confirmed that Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, will make a statement to MPs this afternoon about Venezuela and he suggested she would cover this point in her statement.
The spokesperson claimed it was “hypothetical” to suggest, as Emily Thornberry did in her Westminter Hour interview, that the US move would encourage China or Russia to topple leaders that they don’t like. Asked if Thornberry had a point, the spokesperson said:
I don’t think it’s massively helpful to get into hypothetical scenarios or make comparisons. We respect international law, and we expect countries to do the same.
The spokesperson also declined to comment on Trump’s suggestions that he might seek to topple the regimes in power in Cuba or in Colombia. Asked about these countries, the spokesperson said these were “hypotheticial scenarios”. When it was pointed out that Trump’s threats to these countries go beyond the hypothetical, the spokesperson replied:
The UK’s position on this is clear. We respect international law and any soveriegn state that recognises international law must set out the legal basis for its decisions and actions. That is for the US to speak to.
The spokesperson said that Cooper reiterated the UK’s support for international law when she spoke to Marco Rubio, her US counterpart, last night.
But the spokesperson would not say whether or not the government thinks the US did break international law. Asked about this, the spokesperson referred to what Mike Tapp, the migration minister, said this morning about the need for the US to justify its decision. (See 9.56am.) Asked again what the government thought, the spokesperson also said that there is a long-standing principle that governments don’t publish their internal legal advice. Asked if there were any circumstances in which kidnapping the head of state of another country could be legal, the spokesperson said:
We have long supported the transition of power away from Maduro. He’s an illegitimate president. We shed no tears about the end of his rule in Venezuela.
The spokesperson repeated what Keir Starmer said this morning about the future of Greenland being a matter for Greenland and Denmark, not Trump. (See 12pm.) But he said Nato countries agreed that they faced a threat from Russia in the Arctic. Nato was stepping up to respond, he said.
The spokesperson ducked a question about whether a more “emboldened” US was good for global stability. Asked this, he just said the UK’s relationship with the US was extemely close.
The spokesperson would not say whether the UK would withhold intelligence from the US if it had concerns about the Americans breaking international law. Asked about this, he just said he would not comment on intelligence matters.
Starmer has not yet spoken to Trump about the arrest of Maduro. But it is understood that they are likely to speak later this week, in a call mostly focused on Ukraine.
Updated
UK will abstain if UN security council has to vote on resolution criticising US arrest of Manduro, report claims
The UK will abstain at the United Nations security council if it it asked to vote on a resolution criticising the US arrest of Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan president, Steven Swinford from the Times reports. Swinford says:
Britain will refrain from criticising the US over the capture of Maduro amid concerns about angering Donald Trump
The UK will not make any assessment on whether the action is lawful. If the issue is pushed to a vote at the UN Security Council the UK will abstain
The view is that it is not for the UK to make a judgement on a unilateral action by the US which the government knew nothing about in advance The government is concerned that doing so would risk jeopardising relations with the US at a critical time, particularly on the future of Ukraine
A senior government source said: ‘This was a decision by the US. It is not for us make a judgment on whether it was lawful’
Updated
Starmer says international law 'really important', but won't say if he thinks Trump has complied with it
Speaking to reporters this morning, Keir Starmer said Nicolás Maduro, who was president of Venezuela until he was arrested by the Americans on Saturday and taken to a US jail, was not a legitimate ruler. He said:
What’s happened here in Venezuela is obviously really important. We have long championed a peaceful transition to democracy, because the president was illegitimate.
Asked if he thought US had breached international law when it seized Maduro, Starmer declined to say.
But he said international law would have to be the the “anchor” for the future of Venezuela. He told reporters:
International law is really important. It’s the framework, and it’s for the US to set out its justifications for the actions that it’s taken. But it is a complicated situation. It remains a complicated situation. The most important thing is stability and that peaceful transition to democracy …
I think the vast majority of Labour MPs would say that they want to see democracy in Venezuela. That is hugely important.
Starmer says Greenland and Denmark must decide future of Greenland, not Trump
At the weekend Mette Frederiksen, the Danish prime minister, said Donald Trump has no right to annex Greenland.
Asked about her comments today, Keir Starmer said:
Well, I stand with her, and she’s right about the future of Greenland.
In a separate question, Starmer was asked if he agreed with calls from the Danes for the US president to stop proposing American annexation of the island. He replied:
Yes. Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark are to decide the future of Greenland, and only Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark.
Denmark is a close ally in Europe, it is a Nato ally, and it’s very important the future of Greenland is, as I say, for the Kingdom of Denmark, and for Greenland, and only for Greenland and the Kingdom of Denmark.
Starmer backs Danish PM in saying Trump has no right to any claim over Greenland
Keir Starmer has said he “stands” with Denmark after Donald Trump threatened to annex Greenland, adding that Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen was “right” to refuse the US president any claim to the territory, PA Media reports.
I will post the full quotes when I get them.
John Swinney insists SNP majority would be mandate for new independence referendum at campaign launch
Libby Brooks is the Guardian’s Scotland correspondent.
The SNP struck a determinedly optimistic note at their Holyrood elections campaign launch in Glasgow’s west end this morning.
Successive candidates referenced a “year of opportunity”, “hope” and “a positive vision for the future” - all based on the promise of independence.
The party leadership is urging Scots to vote for a majority of SNP MSPs in May, which they argue will create an unarguable momentum for a second referendum on independence, no matter how vehemently the UK government insists it won’t happen.
The SNP leader and first minister, John Swinney, contrasted this hopeful mood with a UK “lurching to the right” and a UK government “evermore distant from offering solutions to Scotland’s challenges”.
Swinney insisted that his strategy “couldn’t be clearer” that a second referendum “flows from” a SNP Holyrood majority. It’s a “fundamental democratic principle” that the people of Scotland should be allowed to decide their own future, with a precedent of the 2011 election and the subsequent 2014 referendum, he said.
But this still doesn’t address the fact that successive UK governments have said they won’t grant Holyrood the powers to hold another vote - a roadblock that Swinney offers no route around and renders this morning’s optimum pretty empty.
Here is a clip from Swinney’s speech.
John Swinney tells an audience of SNP MSPs and party activists that “ambition is what this party is about” pic.twitter.com/OygmwF3p0i
— Chris McCall (@Dennynews) January 5, 2026
Minister accused of 'cowardice' after declining TV interviewer's challenge to say Trump should not invade Greenland
Donald Trump’s decision to get rid of the Venezuelan president using military force has renewed fears that Greenland is next on his acquisition list.
On Saturday Katie Miller, a rightwing podcaster married to Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, posted this on X.
SOON pic.twitter.com/XU6VmZxph3
— Katie Miller (@KatieMiller) January 3, 2026
On Sky News this morning Sophy Ridge, the presenter, repeatedly tried to get Mike Tapp, the migration minister doing interviews on behalf of the government this morning, to say that annexing Greenland would be unacceptable. In line with Keir Starmer’s thinking on the importance of not upsetting Trump (see 10.28am), Tapp talked about “careful diplomatic conversations” and pointed out that the US and Denmark, which has sovereignty over Greenland, are both Nato members.
Here is the clip.
If Donald Trump moves on Greenland will you condemn it?
— Sophy Ridge (@SophyRidgeSky) January 5, 2026
“We’re not going to give a running commentary”
“You can't say Donald Trump shouldn't invade Greenland?”
“Diplomacy is delicate, which means we're not here to give a running commentary in the news”pic.twitter.com/pKsJUldRHs
Matt Vickers, a Conservative home affairs spokesperson, was also interviewed Sky New this morning, and he too refused to explicitly say that the US should not invade Greenland.
Caroline Lucas, the former Green MP, posted this comment on Tapp’s interview, accusing him of “craven cowardice”.
OMG - just unbelievable - it really shouldn’t be a difficult question. What on earth has happened to the Labour Party, to international law and frankly to any kind of moral compass? Such craven cowardice is deeply dangerous
Updated
Britain will be 'turning corner' in 2026 on cost of living, Starmer claims
Keir Starmer has delivered his ‘cost of living’ message (see 9.56am) at an event at a community centre in Berkshire. According to the PA Media report, he said that the UK would be “turning a corner” in 2026 on this issue.
He said:
It’s really good to be able to come here and speak to you. I’m acutely aware that there are a lot of things going on in the world at the moment, particularly you will see some things this weekend.
But I always remind myself that, for you and millions of people across this country, what matters more than anything is the cost of living, is actually being able to pay bills, making sure that ends meet at the end of the month, and that we’re driving down all those things that cause people a lot of anxiety when they feel they can’t pay the bills.
2026 is the year that we’re going to be turning a corner where – when we say we want national renewal of the country, and we do – it becomes a reality, and people begin to feel the difference in their pockets, in the ability to pay the bill.
That’s why we say we are turning a corner into 2026.
Kemi Badenoch was interviewed on ITV’s Good Morning Britain this morning. On Saturday, like Keir Starmer, she said she wanted to wait before passing judgment on the US decision to seize the Venezuelan president. This morning she was still sitting on the fence, refusing to say whether she supported or opposed the US operation. But she did describe it as “unorthodox”.
When it was put to her that Margaret Thatcher criticised the US invasion of Grenada in 1983, Badenoch suggested that Thatcher was right to do so, but that this intervention was different.
How Starmer suggested criticising Trump over legality of Venezuala raid would not be in 'national interest'
In his long interview with the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg yesterday, Keir Starmer was asked repeatedly about why he was unwilling to condemn the extradition of Nicolás Maduro when it was evidently against international law.
Starmer described himself as “a lifelong advocate of international law and the importance of compliance with international law”, but said that he wanted to get “all the material facts” and establish “the full picture” before he passed comment on the legality of what happened.
But Kuenssberg continued to press him on this, pointing out that all the key facts were already available. At that point Starmer came close to admitting that he did not want to criticise Trump because he judged that was not in the national interest. He said:
The relationship between the US and the UK is one of the closest relationships in the world. It is vitally important for our defence, for our security, for our intelligence. It is my responsibility to make sure that relationship works, as the prime minister of this country, working with the president of the United States …
We do have differences of views on various things but, on the other hand, I constantly remind myself that, 24/7, our defence, our security, and our intelligence relationship with the US matters probably more than any other relationship we’ve got in the world, and it would not be in our national interest to weaken that in any way.
Venezuela attack could embolden China and Russia, says Emily Thornberry
The lack of western condemnation of the US military intervention in Venezuela could embolden China and Russia to take similar action against other countries, Emily Thornberry, the Labour chair of the foreign affairs committee, said in her Westminster Hour interview last night. Peter Walker has the story.
Minister rejects claims government refusing to call Maduro extradition illegal to avoid upsetting Trump
Good morning. Before Christmas, Keir Starmer was planning to use the first week back after the holiday recess to highlight what the government is doing to bring down the cost of living. He set out this case yesterday in an article in the Sunday Times, where he referenced measures including the budget plan to cut energy bills by £150 on average. Unfortunately, Starmer’s cost of living PR blitz has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different different approach to the problem of ensuring his voters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems to be very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is probably good news for Norway.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to abduct Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan leader, and replace him with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the country’s oil industry.
Keir Starmer has declined to criticise the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night all EU states apart from Hungary issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of international law, and by implication accuse Trump of ignoring it. It said:
The European Union calls for calm and restraint by all actors, to avoid escalation and to ensure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under all circumstances, the principles of international law and the UN charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations security council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, the migration minister, was doing an interview round this morning and, on the Today programme, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke international law because he was afraid of upsetting Trump, Tapp replied:
Absolutely not. The British government is, and will, be in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interviews on the BBC’s Westminster Hour, Emily Thornberry, 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 Russia’s Vladimir Putin 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 “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
In the end there is no getting away from it. 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 that and say I literally cannot think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, the Scottish first minister and SNP leader, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, Anas Sarwar, and Scottish Conservative leader, Russell Findlay, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
