Sunak V Starmer

Sunak’s a liar. That’s it. The country has had more than enough of Tory MPs & PMs lying through their teeth to scam the British public.

Yup. Someone being 'useless' in the face of duplicity and bare faced lies is not a mark of weakness in my book. I'm not great with liars myself, when I've met them. I've known some slippery characters over the years, but I don't know if I've come across such an egregious public lie as that one.

Sunaks has been caught lying. Not a good look if you’re trying to pretend to be honest.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd1122q14dxo

Sunak lied, though.
Loser.

Shropshirelass

Yes. Kier Starmer was useless. He keeps saying they have a plan but no idea how to implement it nor how to pay for it. ‘When I was Crown Prosecutor’ , well he isn’t now and failed miserably in this debate. I thought Rishi was good. Clear on what his plans are and how to finance them. I also agree with National Service or Community Service for teens, will give some more of a sense of direction. Hope to God he gets in again and is allowed to finish the recovery he has started. It all takes time.

But it’s a recovery from problems caused by his own party. And Truss is still in that party.

Whitewavemark2

Anyone got any idea how the Tories are going to pay for their promises?

No, Starmer didn’t explore that which was disappointing

Yes. Kier Starmer was useless. He keeps saying they have a plan but no idea how to implement it nor how to pay for it. ‘When I was Crown Prosecutor’ , well he isn’t now and failed miserably in this debate. I thought Rishi was good. Clear on what his plans are and how to finance them. I also agree with National Service or Community Service for teens, will give some more of a sense of direction. Hope to God he gets in again and is allowed to finish the recovery he has started. It all takes time.

Maddyone, I believe Labour has said that they intend to continue to freeze the tax free allowance as per Tories.

It’s becoming clear that the £38 billion was substantially the treasury costing of the policy, and the letter 2 weeks ago was a warning not to enhance it.

The £2000 from every working family was Sunak’s spin, it won’t happen, most will have to come from higher earners, many working families can’t afford £200 let alone £2000.

To make a difference to the NHS and other services tax revenue has got to rise substantially whichever party is in power. Sunak is highlighting tax cuts so he is not aiming to improve services much.

Anyone got any idea how the Tories are going to pay for their promises?

Germanshepherdsmum

The Treasury provided some of the information. Let’s see how the manifesto looks and how much money is going to have to be raised to pay for its contents.

😄 if you mean the figures provided for the HoC library, then indeed they provided some information.

But really!!??

The Treasury provided some of the information. Let’s see how the manifesto looks and how much money is going to have to be raised to pay for its contents.

Germanshepherdsmum

It doesn’t follow that the figure is wrong. We will know more when the Labour manifesto is published.

Well, why didn't he wait until he had the information rather than going against a clear letter saying it wasnt treasury costed?

Thank you HPQ

maddyone

So is Sunak saying they will have a separate tax rate for pensioners?

Yes, basically that is what he is saying. Combined with National Service for teenagers he is making it very obvious who is target voter is!

I know of course, that we pay more tax now than ever before.
We are paying huge amounts of interest on money borrowed to pay furlough during Covid and I believe that furlough was allowed to go on for far too long.

I’m wondering why the Treasury is costing Starmers plan, have they been given advanced notice of the manifesto in detail?.

In any case should the Treasury be neutral in politics?.

Thanks again Doodledog. I think I’m being a bit slow this morning but I was finding it difficult to follow this line of thought during the debate last night. I thought surely no government would make pensioners pay tax on the basic state pension. It doesn’t make sense because the tax free allowance (which has been frozen until 2027/8 by this government) and there is no claim that
I’m aware of that any other government would continue the freeze. Although they might I suppose. I just found these claims puzzling. Apologies.

It doesn’t follow that the figure is wrong. We will know more when the Labour manifesto is published.

It's been proven this morning both by fact checkers and by the published letter from the Treasury that Sunak openly lied about the £2000 tax increase he claimed Labour would cost us, this figure was put out by Tory spads not by independent civil servants in the Treasury. As usual all the Tories have are lies.

Kim19

I 'lasted' eight minutes. Awful. Is this seriously the best our Country can come up with?

It's the best ITV can come up with! Etchingham failed to manage the debate. The background staging and lighting was very distracting. I'm sure the BBC will do better.

Iam64

I watched 15 minutes and decided to read my murder mystery as more relaxing at 9.30pm.
I didn’t lije the format, found the moderator poor, Sunak rude, entitled and shouting ‘I have a plan, the plan is working’ is simply untrue
Starmer seemed to want to avoid shouty sound bites but if Sunak is allowed to continue shouting over him, he may have to respond in a less measured way.
The £2000 a year tax increase was just addressed on radio 4. The interviewer pointed out to the Tory spokeswoman that it’s £250 a year over 4 years.

Etchingham failed to prevent Sunak hogging the debate with soundbites and talking over Starmer. Starmer stuck to the rules of debate but Sunak didn't. Sunak came over as shout and entitled, out of touch with ordinary people.

Germanshepherdsmum

Starmer does indeed need to understand that political debate is not a courtroom. He just didn’t have the answers. He should have been ready with them - as a barrister he knows the importance of preparation - but he really wasn’t. He looked lost, like a frightened rabbit. If he disputes the £2k per person cost of a Labour government he needs to come up with evidence rebutting it. This was a forum where he had to have his answers ready - but he didn’t.

I think the Treasury's Permanent Secretary (a Truss appointee) has already warned the £2,000 claim is not based on official calculations. Another Tory lie but of course they will keep on repeating it for the (dis)benefit of the gullible and blinkered.

Poll produced by sky

The Sunak £2,000 tax claim lie was based on a Tory make-believe version of Labour policies costed by the Treasury. Garbage in, garbage out. The Treasury's top official (appointed under Truss after Kwarteng fired his predecessor) has issued a warning about such a claim not being supported by the Civil Service.