UK

4 Ways Rishi Sunak's Claim Labour Would Raise Taxes By £2,000 Has Backfired – Badly

Although the Tories are still pushing this line, it has snowballed into a flurry of negative coverage for the party.


By Kate Nicholson

HUFFPOST
05/06/2024

PM Rishi Sunak
POOL VIA GETTY IMAGES

Rishi Sunak has caused a huge stir by claiming a Labour government would raise taxes by £2,000 per household.

The prime minister repeated the point at least 10 times during his debate with Keir Starmer last night, and it took the Labour leader some time to dispel the allegation as “garbage”.

So the Conservatives quickly tried to double down on it as a means of attack.

But there are several major issues with the claim – and it looks like it has already backfired against the Tory campaign.

1. A fact-check from civil servants


Sunak repeatedly said that “independent Treasury civil servants” had calculated that Labour would need to put taxes up by £2,000 per household to fund all of their spending plans.


However, the Treasury themselves has denied any such claims – and reminded HuffPost UK that they are not independent, they serve the government.


According to the BBC, the Treasury’s chief civil servant even wrote to Labour saying that he had reminded the Conservatives that this angle “should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service”.

Former permanent secretary to the Treasury, Gus O’Donnell, also told The News Agents’ podcast that this was a “misleading” claim from Sunak – and that civil servants were in way acting independently when they were told to calculate such figures.

The UK’s official statistics regulator also launched an investigation into Sunak’s claim on Wednesday, and US channel CNN have even reported on it.


The Conservatives have maintained they were “fair” in the production of this briefing note.


2. Comparisons to the ‘£350m for the NHS’ promise


After the civil servants called the prime minister out for his claim, comparisons began between this promise and the now infamous vow that leaving the European Union would mean giving £350m per week more to the NHS.


That slogan was proudly printed on the sides of the Vote Leave campaign’s buses – but it remains a mystery to many as to where that money has actually gone.




The UK Statistics Authority has condemned the £350m figure in the past for being “misleading”, and Nigel Farage admitted shortly after the UK voted for Brexit that the figure should never have been a formal part of the Leave campaign.


3. The Tories have already spent £40k promoting it


To make matters worse, the Tories have already been trying to promote this angle on social media for a week.


A campaign poster, launched on May 29, carries the caption: “If you think Labour will win, start saving... Labour promises to cost working families £2,094.”


According to Facebook’s ad library, the Conservatives have spent between £35,000 and £40,000 pushing this message across Instagram and Facebook.



It has supposedly reached more than a million users in that time.


4. Sunak’s own method means his government would raise taxes by £3k


When the Tory-supporting Spectator deployed the same questionable methods Sunak’s camp used to come up with the £2,000 figure, the outlet found the prime minister’s own plans would mean raising taxes by even more – £3,000 per household.


The magazine suggested the Conservatives had calculated the total cost of all their opponent’s promises and divided that by the number working households (without pensioners or non-working households included).


Then they added up how that tax could be spread over the next four years.

The magazine did the same for the Tories, and found it works out at £3,020 – making the Conservative plans supposedly £1,000 more expensive than Labour’s.

'Annoyed but not surprised': Outrage as benefits, welfare and DWP all but absent from election debate


'The Tories and Labour seem to be acting like disabled people are invisible during the election campaign'

EMILY CHUDY

BIG ISSUE 
5 Jun 2024

Charities and campaigners speak out as benefits and welfare absent from election debate (Toa Heftiba/Unsplash)

Charities and campaigners have spoken out about feeling “invisible” as key topics like poverty, benefits and welfare were largely left out of ITV’s election debate between Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer on Tuesday (4 June).

The debate, which saw prime minister Sunak face off with Labour leader Starmer, did mention the cost of living crisis, but left out discussion on benefits and welfare, which many have said is critical to the upcoming election.

After being asked about the cost of living by audience member Paula from Huddersfield, Sunak claimed the Conservatives’ plan to “bring inflation back to normal” has been in effect, and that the furlough scheme during the pandemic had supported working families.

Starmer claimed that “this government has lost control” over the cost of living, and that Sunak’s predecessor Liz Truss had “crashed the economy”.

But campaigners have said the conversion did not go far enough, and that a clear plan on the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), benefits, and the universal credit system is desperately needed.

Journalist and disability activist Rachel Charlton-Dailey told the Big Issue they were “annoyed but not surprised” at the lack of discussion around benefits during the debate.

“The Tories and Labour seem to be acting like disabled people are invisible during the election campaign,” she explained.

“This is either in the hope nobody brings up cruel reforms or so they don’t have to commit to any plans. It was saddening no questions were asked about welfare as it reminds us how little we’re thought of.”

They added that ahead of the general election, all parties need to consider those on personal independence payments (PIP) and universal credit, telling politicians they must “do your research and engage with those with lived experience”.

“Benefits, welfare and poverty should be a huge part of campaigns. We’re living through the toughest times and people need to know they’re going to be protected even if they can’t work,” she added.

“The lack of discussion around welfare when the Tories have spent the last few months banging on about reforms is eerie.”

“Next government must increase universal credit so people have enough money to survive”

Nearly one million people only £10 a week away from poverty, study finds

Food bank charity the Trussell Trust added that 79% of the UK public agree that “poverty in the UK is a big problem”, with almost three in four believing “it’s the government’s responsibility to change this”.

“Neither leader seemed to have a plan to address this,” Helen Barnard, director of policy at the Trussell Trust, told Big Issue.

“We see people coming through the doors of food banks every day because they cannot afford to make ends meet. They haven’t got enough money, because their income is too low, to afford even the essentials, like food, heating, and toiletries.

“Despite the disappointment of this most pressing of issues being ignored in the first leadership debate, we hope that in the coming weeks all major political parties will urgently prioritise hunger and hardship, and outline how they would end the need for food banks in the UK for good.”

Poverty charity Turn2us added that the demand for a system that “truly supports and reassures” those struggling the most is “loud and clear” across the UK, and that politicians must “listen to people’s experiences”.

The charity’s call echoes one of the main asks of Big Issue’s Blueprint for Change, which calls for the next government to reform the benefits system and replace it with a system that helps those most in need.

“This means ensuring benefits cover essential living costs and abolishing the two-child benefit limit and sanctions,” Claire Atchia McMaster, director of income and external affairs at Turn2us, told Big Issue.

“People who contact Turn2us describe the welfare system as punitive and broken. Policies like benefit sanctions, the two-child limit, and stricter conditionality are destroying trust, damaging health, and deterring people when they need help the most.”