TV debate 1: Five areas Starmer failed in the ITV leaders debate

Last night (Tuesday 4th June) saw the first televised party leaders debate between Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and leader of the Labour party Sir Keir Starmer, hosted by Julie Etchingham on ITV.

The overwhelming consensus following the debate was that it was a clear victory for Rishi Sunak. The Prime Minister came across as more polished, confident and assertive, whilst Starmer appeared flustered and failed to answer many of the questions posed to him. For a party whose policies are deemed to lack any substance and who are accused of lacking a clear plan for the country, this was a disappointing performance from Starmer, who missed a big opportunity to open up on his parties plans for the country should they get into power.

Instead, the public remain in the dark about many key areas of Labour party policy, and unconvinced about how their spending plans will be funded, despite repeated (but thus far unfounded) claims from Starmer that all plans are “fully costed and fully funded”.

Here are 5 areas where Starmer failed to articulate a clear policy position in last night’s debate:

1.  Unable to answer how Labour will plug the funding gaps identified in their spending commitments

Labour’s spending plans outweigh planned tax increases by up to £10 billion per year, or £38 billion over four years. Rishi Sunak repeatedly claimed that Labour will have no choice but to increase taxes by £2,000 a year for every household in order to plug this gap. Whilst that particular figure has come under some scrutiny in the hours since, Sir Keir Starmer was unable to put voters minds at ease over this significant funding deficit.

Despite stating that the £2,000 claim was “utter rubbish”, Starmer failed to explain why the figures were false, or how his party will bridge this gap without raising taxes. For a party whose first policy pledge is to achieve economic stability, his inability to respond with any authority or certainty on this subject will have left many unconvinced that this Labour party can be trusted with the economy.

2.  Unable to answer how Labour will resolve the doctors’ strikes

Another area where a flustered Starmer failed to answer a direct question posed to him by the Prime Minister was how to resolve the ongoing industrial action that has hampered the Conservatives efforts to bring down NHS waiting lists over the past 12 months. Whilst he was happy to point to the clear and obvious failings in the Tories management of the NHS, and Sunak’s inability to hit the targets for NHS wait times that he included amongst his 5 pledges, when the direction of questioning was turned on Starmer, he failed to offer anything resembling a clear plan for resolution. Instead, he tried to maintain focus on Tory failings in the past few years rather than address how to move the situation forward.

Starmer did state that he would not agree to the 35% pay rise that Junior Doctors have steadfastly demanded since the strikes began, which was reassuring to hear. But other than saying he would “get in the room and negotiate” (which the Tories have been attempting to do for many months now), there was nothing of any substance offered by the Labour leader. So, if the Junior Doctors continue to hold firm on their demands faced with Starmer sat across the negotiating table in the months to come, we remain none the wiser as to how the situation might be resolved.

3.  Unable to explain how Labour will fund their green energy revolution

We have heard for months how Labour intend to pay for a multitude of spending commitments with just 2 clear policies: a windfall tax on oil and gas companies; and by abolishing Non-Dom tax status. However, it is common knowledge that windfall taxes are already being levied against the large energy companies, meaning they are currently paying an effective tax rate of 75%. And whilst abolishing Non-Dom tax status could bring in up to £4billion a year in tax revenues, this is wholly dependent on these highly mobile high net worth individuals (who own properties in multiple tax jurisdictions) keeping their base in the UK and simply accepting the additional tax burden, rather than jetting off to reside more permanently in one of their many other overseas homes. This seems highly unlikely.

So, with Labour’s plans to decarbonize the energy grid by 2023 estimated to cost £116billion, according to a report published by independent consultants Aurora Energy, and with Labour’s meagre taxation policies unlikely to scratch the surface of such massive investment requirements, genuine questions remain as to how Labour’s impossibly ambitious green energy revolution will be paid for.

Unfortunately, Rishi Sunak did not push the Labour leader hard enough on this point in the debate, as Starmer clearly has no answer on this one.

4.  Unable to say what Labour will do to stop illegal small boat crossings

Remarkably, having spent much of the past year adamantly stating that he would reverse the Rwanda plan if Labour get into power, even if it is working, last night Sir Keir Starmer admitted that he would consider 3rd country processing of asylum claims, if the need called for it. The latest in a long line of U-turns from the Labour leader came amidst a flummoxed and weary ramble about how Labour will deal with illegal immigration by “smashing the gangs”, a tired and vague line that has been rolled out incessantly over recent months.

Labour’s “smash the gangs” plan hinges on the implementation of a border command force, which will work with intelligence services at home and abroad to find and stop the criminal gangs that are responsible for organizing the illegal small boat crossings in the channel. All sounds reasonable enough, however with two major problems that Starmer failed to address:

(i). As pointed out by Home Secretary James Cleverly on LBC earlier this week… this border command force already exists! It is called The Small Boats Operational Command, it is led by a former British military General, and it works with British and foreign law enforcement agencies. So, Labour’s flagship idea for tackling illegal immigration is not new or radical, and therefore is unlikely to produce different results; and

(ii). Labour’s plan does not address how they will deal with the huge backlog of asylum claims that the Home Office is currently faced with. It is common knowledge that Labour are likely to offer an immigration amnesty to all asylum claimants, whether here legally or illegally, and regardless of whether they are able to demonstrate who they are or where they have come from. They will do this simply to get the number of claims down, despite the fact that with no documents we have no way of knowing the criminal histories of these claimants, all in the pursuit of political points scoring, which is prioritized over the safety of British citizens.

Neither of these concerns were addressed by Starmer during the debate, leaving many still believing that a Labour Government would welcome open borders and uncontrolled immigration into this country.

5.  Unable to explain how the public will pay to convert their boilers and cars

We have already talked about how Starmer has failed to fully explain how the mammoth cost of decarbonizing the energy grid will be funded. But another point that was put to him directly by the Prime Minister was how he expects ordinary working families to afford to convert their central heating systems from gas boilers to heat pumps, or to change their petrol and diesel cars for much more expensive electric ones.

The average cost of a heat pump unit and installation is £8,000 - £10,000. On top of that, the cost to convert all the radiators in an average family home in order to accommodate this switch can add thousands more to the overall cost.

At the time of writing, the cost of buying a brand new petrol Vauxhall Corsa is £17,890. The cost of an electric Vauxhall Corsa is £31,930. That is a price differential of £14,040, or to put it another way, the electric version is 80% more expensive!

Given Labour want to ban the sale of new petrol/diesel cars and gas boilers by 2030, this would burden hard working families with thousands of pounds worth of additional costs that they didn’t ask for and can’t afford.

When challenged on this by Sunak, Starmer failed to provide any meaningful response, leaving viewers to contemplate how soon they should start saving their hard-earned cash in order to pay the cost of Labour’s irresponsible and unnecessary green policies.

Verdict:

With so many failings in Keir Starmers performance last night, very evidently it is 1-0 to Rishi Sunak following the first leaders debate. If Keir Starmer plans to even the score at the next debate, he will have to be much more assertive in his responses, articulate some actual policies rather than just the vague notions that have been peddled by his party thus far, and be much quicker in getting to the key messages he wants voters to hear.