Sunak and Starmer fight over Brexit, taxes and immigration in their latest face-to-face

The face-to-face between Sunak and Starmer has been characterized by a huge contrast in attitude. The prime minister has been surprised by his energy and the constant attacks and interruptions to his opponent, done in the combative tone typical of someone who has little to lose.

His closing statement began with an apology (“I understand why you are frustrated with our party, with me”). His message, focused on repeating the importance of not “handing over” control to the Labor Party, seemed more focused on reducing the transfer of the conservative vote to Reform UK, the party of far-right Nigel Farage, than on retaining his position as prime minister.

[La campaña de Sunak se embarra: investigan a una candidata por apostar sobre las elecciones]

starmeron the other hand, He has shown more restraint in his responses; avoiding concrete promises and taking great care not to damage the 20 point advantage that all the polls give him.

The lack of integrity among the political class has opened the debate organized by the BBCinterrupted at times by pro-Palestine protests taking place in the same building.

Bets on the election date and outcome have forced the Conservatives and Labor to withdraw several candidates. The investigation by the United Kingdom National Gambling Commission in this regard is still ongoing.

Starmer has taken the opportunity to make a reference to Partygate, [el escándalo de las fiestas organizadas por miembros del gobierno británico durante el confinamiento] and promise a “return of politics to public service”, different from “14 years of conservative government without the slightest integrity.” He premiere British, on the other hand, has defined himself as a “consistent” person while his rival “says one thing and does another.”

[Vuelve ‘Mr. Brexit’: Farage, el impulsor de la salida de la UE’, podría llegar, esta vez sí, al Parlamento]

Immigration and taxes have been the two dominant topics of the nightSunak has not wasted any opportunity to warn of future tax rises by a hypothetical Labour government, promising to cut taxes if he is re-elected to office, a promise that Starmer has avoided backing up.

The Conservative Party has made efforts to emphasize fiscal policy throughout the campaigngoing so far as to change the name of his account on which Starmer has flatly rejected and described as a “lie.”

Sunak has also referred to Nottingham, the progressive government town where the debate was taking place and which has recently declared bankruptcy, describing it as “a vision of the future” with a Labor government.

Immigration has been the other big topic of discussion.. During his speeches, Sunak defended his plan to send migrants who enter the UK illegally to Rwanda as a “deterrent strategy”.

starmer, for his part, has emphasized his experience as Director of the Crown Prosecution Service. Lawyer has focused on the importance of pursuing the gangs that manage the transport of migrants and the need to manage the long list of asylum applications, refusing to answer Sunak’s question about whether he would be willing to negotiate with the governments of Iran, Syria or Afghanistan in the process.

Perhaps the only question that both Sunak and Starmer have tried to avoid is the one related to the brexit. Mishal Husain’s insistencemoderator of the BCC, has forced the candidates to present a plan to improve trade relations with Europe. Sunak has sought to redirect the question towards his tax cuts proposals, while Starmer promised to reopen negotiations with Brussels, although insisting that he would reject any proposal that would result in increased immigration. “We are not going to return (to the EU),” the Labor Party clarified.

Sunak’s energy may have had an effect on his voterswith 82% of the people who voted tory in 2019 giving him victory in the debate, according to a survey by YouGov. However, it is difficult for his performance to save a campaign that began with an announcement of early elections in the rain and the absence of D-Day celebrations, and that has dragged on for years of discontent with his party’s management of public services. immigration and the economy.