Rishi Sunak says his ‘working assumption’ is that general election will take place in second half of 2024 – UK politics live

The full text of Keir Starmer’s speech this morning is now on Labour’s website.

One of the most intriguing passages, which was not trailed in advance, came when Keir Starmer promised a calmer politics – an end to politics as psychodrama and Twitter rows, which is what it seems to have become recently. He said:

With respect and service I also promise this: a politics that treads a little lighter on all of our lives.

Because that’s the thing about populism, or nationalism, any politics fuelled by division.

It needs your full attention. It needs you constantly focusing on this week’s common enemy. And that’s exhausting, isn’t it?

On the other hand, a politics that aspires to national unity, bringing people together, the common good, that’s harder to express, less colourful, fewer clicks on social media. And, in some ways, it’s more demanding of you.

It asks you to moderate your political wishes out of respect for the different wishes of others. 45 million voters can’t get everything that they want, that’s democracy.

If Starmer delivers on this, it will be bad news for political journalists. (He is basically proposing to make politics more boring.) But Luke Tryl, the UK director for the campaign group More in Common, says the public will be grateful.

Listen to any focus group and it’s so clear – after Brexit, Covid, Partygate Cost of Living, the public are simply exhausted with politics. There is a big electoral prize for whoever can convince people they’ll be able to turn on the news and not worry about what they’ll see/hear

Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite, one of the main trade unions supporting Labour, has said Keir Starmer is not being realistic if he is relying on growth to fund the investment needed to improve Britain.

In a statement issued in response to his speech this morning she also said Labour should nationalise energy companies. She said:

Undoubtedly the country needs change and it is crying out for different choices to be made. It is now critical that workers and communities can see clearly what choices Labour is proposing.

For example, Keir rightly says we are exposed on the international stage regarding energy. The choice that needs to be made in order to reduce sky high prices is for energy – and in particular the National Grid – to be brought into public ownership.

Put simply ‘project hope’ will require serious investment. Relying on growth to generate that investment is not realistic. We have not had significant growth since the 1970s. If we depend on growth to fund all the investment we need it will only result in inertia.

Britain needs a Labour government – but it needs it to be serious about real change.

During his Q&A this morning Keir Starmer sought to rebut Tory claims that his £28bn a year green investment plan was a financial liability, partly by saying that his main focus was Labour’s zero-carbon electricity by 2030 target. (See 11.03am and 2.30pm.) If Labour could not afford to borrow the money for the £28bn fund, it would not happen, he said.

The Conservatives are now claiming this answer makes tax rises under Labour even more likely. In a statement released by CCHQ Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, said:

Sir Keir Starmer today recommitted to his 2030 plans which Labour say would cost £28bn a year.

Given his claim to be committed to fiscal responsibility, such large sums can only be funded through tax rises which means more pressure on working families and lower economic growth – just at the time the Conservative government is starting to cut taxes.

Steve Barclay and Steve Reed make rival pitches for farming vote at Oxford farming conference

Helena Horton

The environment secretary, Steve Barclay, and his Labour counterpart, Steve Reed, were making their pitches to farmers this morning at the Oxford farming conference.

Barclay announced a shake-up to the post-Brexit farming payment schemes which replace the EU’s common agricultural policy. He said:

We will pay you more for taking part in our environmental and management series. On average, this is an increase in rates by 10% to make it more attractive for you to get in, and those already in schemes will automatically benefit from this. And in addition, if you have a plan to put things together in a way that makes a significant difference, you will be paid a premium for that as well.

The Guardian revealed yesterday that there is an underspend of hundreds of millions missing from farmers’ pockets after changes and delays to the schemes that pay farmers to protect the nature on their land.

Environmentalists may have been alarmed by his speech because in it he confirmed the Tories would continue the badger cull if they won the general election. Labour has committed to ending the cull. He also announced he was looking at reviewing the powers of the regulators Natural England and the Environment Agency, which he said were “too suspicious” of farmers. Agriculture is the leading cause of river pollution.

Reed gave a bombastic speech where he relished the idea of potentially soon being the environment secretary. He said:

We may just be a few weeks away from a general election. Of course I wish the secretary of state well in his new role, but I do hope he is embarking on what will be his farewell tour.

He said “farmers have been abandoned by the government” and promised to tackle rural inequality if he became environment secretary.

Reed also promised a closer trading relationship with Europe and said that 6,000 UK farming businesses had closed since 2017.

At one point during his Q&A Keir Starmer made a reference to the large number of questions he was taking from journalists who attended his speech. Everyone seemed to get a question, and this came over as a sign of confidence. It was not one of those occasions where the leader just calls the three most supportive reporters in the room as quickly as possible. It would not be fair to say everyone got an answer. But even when Starmer is being evasive, he is increasingly good at doing it in such a way as to ensure that it does not really show.

Here are the main points. I have updated some of the earlier posts with direct quotes. When I refer to them here, you may need to refresh the page to get the updates to appear.

• Starmer played down talk of Labour offering tax cuts at the general election, saying that he thought growth was the “first lever” he would look to as a means of making people richer. (See 12.06pm.) But he also said: “In principle I do want to see lower taxes on working people.” His comments were interesting in the light of the claim that Labour is considering committing to cutting income tax or national insurance in its manifesto, but in truth Labour is unlikely to take a final decision on this until after the budget and much closer to the election, when it might know more about the Tory counter offer.

• He said that he was “fundamentally opposed” to cutting inheritance tax because this would only benefit the rich. (See 10.52am.) He was asked about this in the light of reports that the Tories want to cut it, or at least commit to a cut in their manifesto. The plan is popular with voters, even though only around 4% of estates (ie, only the most wealthy families in the country) pay it. The Conservative party is constantly looking for “dividing lines” that it wants Labour to oppose. Labour did not opposed the autumn statement tax cuts, it reportedly won’t oppose an income tax cut if (as expected) that’s in the March budget, but today Starmer showed that an inheritance tax cut would serve as a dividing line.

• He said that, if Labour’s fiscal rules did not allow the party to borrow the money needed for its £28bn annual green jobs investment fund, that investment would not happen. He said:

We have set out how that will be funded: the money that is needed for the investment, that is undoubtedly needed; saying that the £28bn will be ramped up in the second half of the parliament; that it will be subject of course to any money that the government is already putting in; and it will be subject to our fiscal rules.

That means that if the money is from borrowing, which it will be, borrowing to invest, that the fiscal rules don’t allow it, then we will borrow less.

The Conservatives have made the £28bn a year green investment plan a key attack line, arguing that Labour could only fund it through borrowing and that as a result it would lead to higher taxes. But Starmer said today that, because of the points he was making, this attack was “utterly misconceived”. He also implied that what matter most to him was his target to deliver zero-carbon electricity by 2030. (See 11.03am.) Paul Waugh from the i reckons there were three tweaks to the policy in these answers.

Starmer 3 tweaks to green pledge.
1. “The £28bn will be ramped up in the 2nd half of the parliament” [may not hit it until 2029]
2. “…subject to money the govt is already putting in..” [<28bn]
3. “If the fiscal rules don’t allow it then we will borrow less” [cd be much lower]

• Starmer rejected claims that he wanted to avoid debating Rishi Sunak at the general election. Those reports were “nonsense”, he said. He went on:

I’ve been saying bring it on for a very, very long time. I’m happy to debate any time.

The question was prompted by this passage in an article by Tim Shipman in the Sunday Times at the weekend. But Shipman did not say Starmer would not debate Sunak – only that Labour would prefer to avoid debates. Shipman said:

Conversations with broadcasters [about debates] have already begun. Aides close to Starmer would prefer to duck them. “We have nothing to gain,” one said. “[But] if the Tories make a big issue of it, I guess we will have to.”

And here are some more lines from what Rishi Sunak has been saying in Mansfield, where he visited a youth centre.

This Saturday, a big tax cut is coming in, every working person across the country is going to benefit from it. It’s worth £450 to an average person in work on the average salary.

We want to do more because, as we manage the economy responsibly, we can cut your taxes, give you and your family peace of mind, immediate relief from some of the challenges you’re facing and confidence that the future is going to be better for you and your children. That is the journey that we’re on.

A vote for anybody who’s not a Conservative candidate, a Conservative MP, is a vote for Keir Starmer in power.

There’s only going to be two options for prime minister after the next election: it’s either going to be me or Keir Starmer. A vote for anyone who is not a Conservative is a vote for Keir Starmer in power.

Look, 2023, I’ll be honest, it wasn’t the easiest of years, for any of us, it wasn’t an easy year for our country …

I’m going to tell you, I know that 2024 is going to be a better year. I want to make sure that all you believe 2024 is going to be a better year too.

• He claimed he was “making progress” on his five priorities, arguing the economy was outperforming expectations and that debt was “on track to be lower and falling”. The Institute for Government disagrees. The five priorities were announced a year ago today.

More broadly, I think that gives you a sense of the difference between Conservative and Labour party.

I’m someone who, I think, people know knows how to manage the economy responsibly and well. That’s why we’re able to say we’ve halved inflation last year, and I said we would, and this Saturday we’re going to be cutting people’s taxes, a £450 tax cut for an average person in work.

Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, and Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, are both accusing Rishi Sunak of “squatting” in Downing Street when he should be calling a general election.

Starmer told the BBC:

We are ready for a general election. I think the country is ready for a general election.

The prime minister has hinted without setting a date that it might be later this year. Why can’t he set a date? Him squatting in Downing Street for months on end, dithering and delaying while the country wants change.

And Davey said:

Rishi Sunak has bottled it and is running scared of a May general election.

Squatter Sunak is holed up in Downing Street, desperately clinging on to power rather than facing the verdict of the British people.

We need an election in spring, so that voters can finally get rid of this appalling and out-of-touch Conservative government.

Earlier this week the Daily Mirror published opinion polling suggesting that two-thirds of people want a general election by the summer. Of those, 31% of people said it should be as soon as possible and 19% said it should be in the spring.

The “squatter” claim is another example of Gordon Brown’s influence on the lexicon of modern politics. Starmer and Davey were both referencing a Sun front page that described Brown as a “squatter holed up in No 10” after he did not resign immediately following his general election defeat in 2010.

In fact, Brown was just following constitutional convention saying the PM should not resign until they are in a position to recommend a successor to the monarch. At the time of the Sun splash, coalition haggling was taking place and it was not clear who would be best placed to form the next government.

The timing of a general election is one of the few decisions in politics entirely in the hands of a prime minister. The normal rule is to say as little about it as possible.

So why has Rishi Sunak apparently ruled out a spring election? Almost certainly, because he calculated that if he did not do this soon, Labour would accuse him, first of “dithering”, and then of “bottling” a May election (assuming he did not have one).

The evidence that Labour were planning this was increasingly obvious. Party sources have been quoted in the papers saying Labour HQ was planning for a May election, based on its reading of what the government was doing (such as implementing the autumn statement tax cuts from January, not April as normal, and scheduling the budget for very early in March). The tactic became obvious when Emily Thornberry, the shadow attorney general, told Sky News last week a May election was “the worst-kept secret in Westminster”.

All this prompted Paul Goodman, the editor of the ConservativeHome website, to write an article this week urging Sunak to rule out a May election before expectations got out of control. Sunak has taken his advice.

Did Sunak really need to? Perhaps not. Labour figures work on the assumption that “bottling” an election can be fatal for a prime minister because it was for Gordon Brown, who never recovered from allowing the whole political world to assume he was going to call an election in the autumn of 2008 before he called it off. But this is partly a misreading of what happened. What really did for Brown was not cancelling the election, but giving an interview afterwards claiming that his decision had nothing to do with the opinion polls. He was lying, and voters knew it. His reputation tanked afterwards because of what people learned about his honesty, not his decision-making capabilities.

Sunak was in a stronger position because, contrary to what Thornberry said last week, a May election was not Westminster’s “worst-kept secret”. Most people in Westminster were working on the firm assumption that the election would be in the autumn. That’s because we think that, faced with the choice of being PM for four more months or 10 more months, Sunak will opt for the latter. All prime ministers in modern times facing near certain election defeat have done the same.

It is true that some of the Treasury decisions taken recently did seem motivated by the need to keep open the option of having the election in May. But that is just sensible strategic planning; it did not mean the May option was being favoured.

Perhaps Labour will now claim to have bounced Sunak out of holding a May election? But they were bouncing him into a position he almost certainly favoured anyway, and close reading of what he said (see 12.39pm) shows that he has not absolutely ruled out going early anyway.

Rishi Sunak has said he expects the general election to take place in the second half of this year. Speaking to broadcasters on a visit to a youth centre in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, he said:

My working assumption is we’ll have a general election in the second half of this year and in the meantime I’ve got lots that I want to get on with.

Asked if he could rule out a May election, Sunak repeated it was his “working assumption” that the vote will be held later in the year. He said:

I want to keep going, managing the economy well and cutting people’s taxes. But I also want to keep tackling illegal migration.

So, I’ve got lots to get on with and I’m determined to keep delivering for the British people.

As expected, Keir Starmer was asked about tax policy during his Q&A with journalists.(See 10.02am.) It has been reported that the party is considering making income tax cuts a manifesto commitment. Starmer did not rule this out, but he did play down the prospect.

This is what he said when asked if he would cut people’s taxes by unfreezing income tax thresholds. The question was prompted by the fact that Labour has been criticising the government for freezing them, creating a “stealth tax” by dragging more and more people into paying tax, or into a higher tax band, every year.

Starmer replied:

I do want more people to have more money in their pocket. That’s a fundamental principle we start with.

Now, the question is: how do we get to that? I’m challenged on tax all of the time.

The first lever that we want to pull, the first place we will go, is growth in our economy because that’s what’s been missing for 14 years. Without growth, we won’t have the money to run our public services … That’s why we’ve put all of our focus on growth and the economy.

Where we are going to make adjustments to tax, we have been really clear about what that looks like. We have said what are going to do with VAT on private schools, the non-dom status, the loopholes that we have.

As Pat McFadden said this morning on the media, any tax cuts have to be fair and affordable, and we have to be realistic about that. (See 9.55am.)

But I think the place to go is to growth on this.

Starmer also said that, with the tax burden at its highest since the second world war, the Tories could not attack Labour over tax.

Later, when asked if he would prioritise tax cuts for businesses or for individuals (see 11.07am), Starmer warned about what happened when Liz Truss cut taxes – reinforcing his point about cuts only being possible if they were affordable.

The campaign group Green New Deal Rising has expressed concern about Keir Starmer’s comments in his Q&A about his commitment to Labour’s £28bn annual green investment fund. (See 10.51am and 11.03am.) This is from Hannah Martin, its co-director.

Instead of backing down from another key promise, Labour should be pledging £28bn investment from day one of a new parliament, and using the money to reprogramme our economy so that it works for all of us and not just big business and shareholders. £28bn per year is the minimum we need to fulfil our climate targets and reverse economic decline.

Voters want to see a strong commitment to tackling the climate crisis at the next election. Labour should be setting fiscal rules that encourage much-needed investment in our economy to create jobs, reduce inequality and prevent catastrophic climate change.

The Labour party must not kill off its £28bn through death by a thousand cuts. Young people are watching and will hold Labour to account to deliver a green new deal that responds to the scale of the cost of living crisis and climate catastrophe we face.

John McDonnell, who was shadow chancellor when Jeremy Corbyn was Labour leader, has written an article for the Guardian saying that if Keir Starmer is not clear about what Labour will do when it is in power, it will create a policy vacuum that will be filled by the far right.

Here is an extract.

If there is a vacuum in the political debate both in the run-up to the election and also, as importantly, after the election, it will be filled by others. And this is my warning. There is a real and rising danger that this political vacuum could be filled by the far right. The polling figures for the Reform party demonstrate already how a far-right populist programme can pull the major parties on to a rightwing agenda …

People will be patient as they fully realise how broken Britain is, but the foundations of credible and radical change will have to be seen to be being laid early in the life of the incoming Labour government. People will need to see how there is a real strategy to restore the value of wages and incomes held back for so long under the Tories, how investment in our public services is taking place and how reform doesn’t mean more privatisation, and how the grotesque levels of inequality in our society are being reduced.

If Labour fails to set out early on a path of radical change to secure the all-round wellbeing and security of our people, then inevitably disillusionment will set in. The risk then is the potential for a significant shift in our politics to the right, with the return of a Conservative party, completely shorn of any traditional one nation Tories and under the dominance of the populist right both within the party and beyond.

And here is the article (which is a good example of the point made earlier – see 9.37am – about how complaints about Starmer not having a policy agenda are often really complaints about the agenda being too conservative).

Steven Morris

The venue for Keir Starmer’s speech – the Bristol and Bath Science Park – wasn’t the most original. During the 2015 general election campaign Ed Miliband and David Cameron came here in consecutive days.

Miliband gave a speech at the National Composites Centre shortly after Labour launched its “the doctor can’t see you” poster campaign, showing a winding queue of people. The day before Cameron, campaigning alongside the then chancellor George Osborne, was on site to commit to lowering taxes and raising the personal tax-free allowance.

The science park is Emersons Green, south Gloucestershire, seven miles north east of Bristol city centre, an area currently held by the Conservatives.

Starmer gave his speech at the composite centre in front of something called a “robotic deposition system for carbon fibre”. Boeing use it in the construction of fuselages for the 787 Dreamliner.

The audience included business leaders, Labour party workers and politicians including the Bristol directly elected mayor, Marvin Rees.