It’s election season. Prospect has invited writers and experts to an election group chat. Imagine a WhatsApp group of your most politically informed friends from across the ideological spectrum on-hand to discuss the biggest and smallest issues. Today, we ask them our inaugural question.
Emily Lawford: It’s the first leaders debate tonight, between Sunak and Starmer. What will you be looking out for? And how much could this debate shift the polls?
Frances Ryan: I’ll be timing how long it takes Rishi Sunak to lose his rag. One of Sunak’s weaknesses, I think, is how tetchy he gets when pressed for any kind of accountability. We see this in his awkward exchanges with members of the public and his frustration when he talks to journalists. When he debated Liz Truss in the Conservative party leadership election, he was widely seen by audiences as patronising and arrogant. At least he’s not up against a woman this time so he won’t risk looking sexist again.
Zoë Grünewald: There’s still so much that could happen for any TV appearance to move the dial substantially. But debates like this can be good for swing voters who might just make a gut decision based on vibes. As such, this will be all about attacking each other’s character. Starmer is going to try and needle Sunak’s sore spots while Sunak will paint Starmer as untrustworthy and flaky. I’ll be curious to see if Labour can land its attack on Sunak’s professional background. As an idea, it works pretty well. It taps into Sunak being too rich and out of touch to empathise with the public and neutralises the Tories’ attack on Labour’s actions during the recession. Importantly, it also highlights the difference in professional backgrounds between the pair. One is a public servant and human rights lawyer, the other made money out of the financial crash. Who would you trust more as your prime minister? In practice, though, the detail of Sunak’s business is a little complicated and Labour has to be careful that it doesn’t look hostile to the City of London or the business interests it’s been courting for months now. It’s a tricky line to tread—but one that could be highly effective.
Frances Ryan: Yes, Sunak was a big fan of the “my parents are humble pharmacists” line in the Tory leadership debate. Based on the video Labour HQ put out yesterday - where they discuss Sunak’s role making millions from the global financial crash - the party are willing to pull him up on that image.
Matthew d’Ancona: Illogically, but palpably, Nigel Farage’s absence will feel like Trump’s no-show at the Republican primary debates. Sunak and Starmer will offer varieties of beige while the media wonder where the nasty but compelling Technicolor has gone. It will be like the worst think tank fringe event in the history of the world.
Peter Kellner: Simple. I’ll be looking for gaffes. Realistically, there’s nothing that either Sunak or Starmer can say that will add significantly to their popularity. But they could lose votes if they mess up badly—if viewers come away thinking they are weak or dishonest or incompetent. For that reason I expect Starmer to be cautious, even boring. Sunak’s dilemma is that he needs to be aggressive and take risks in order to try and destabilise Starmer—but the more risks Sunak takes, the greater the chance he will screw up.
Peter Hitchens: I’ll be waiting keenly for the end. Only a sense of duty and the hope of an upset make me watch these rehearsed encounters.
Marie Le Conte: With the important caveat that I don't believe the debates will significantly change anything, I do think it is worth remembering that Sunak is usually good at debates. He was the one who stood in for Boris back at the 2019 election and he did well then. It is true that he got visibly frustrated with Liz Truss but, hand on heart, who wouldn't? He's not very comfortable around voters but he can hold his own against other politicians. Starmer, on the other hand, is still fairly untested when it comes to debates, so it'll be interesting to see how he fares. Still, it really is unlikely that the dial will shift in any way after tonight.
Nadine Batchelor-Hunt: What I’m looking out for is how they come across to the public, and whether they’re able to connect with voters. Keir Starmer has been more successful in coming across as empathetic and relatable than Rishi Sunak, who—particularly in debates, as we saw against Liz Truss—can come across as slightly haughty or thin-skinned. Sunak didn’t do particularly well in debates against Truss as a result of that, so it’ll be interesting to see if he’s had any media training and if it pays off—particularly given the Tories are running a somewhat presidential campaign focusing a lot on Sunak as a person. Coming across well in the debate is far more important for Sunak than Starmer as a result, and given his personal approval ratings are significantly lower than Starmer’s. For Starmer and Labour, their main priority will be to play it safe and not say or do anything outrageous to screw up Labour’s poll lead, which seems pretty unstoppable at the moment. Ultimately, I don’t think the debate will radically affect the polls. But if Sunak gets it right and comes across well, it might give the Tories some reprieve or hope if they get a small poll bounce following a bruising start to the week with Reform’s announcements—which is valuable for them and their campaigners, as morale is obviously running pretty low for the Tories at the moment.
Tim Bale: What I’d like to see is a really meaty, policy-rich discussion of the alternatives on offer from both parties. What I expect to see is a total snoozefest of focus group-tested, well-rehearsed, anecdote-laden lines—and all on cloyingly polite first-name terms, natch. Tonight’s debate is unlikely to make much difference to the parties’ respective ratings, although (given head-to-heads are inherently presidential in format) it may shift their leaders’ ratings a little. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see if Sunak still tries to out-Farage Farage and whether Starmer, at last, tries a little bit of the “hopey”, as well as yet more of the “changey”, thing.
Philip Collins: I hope they don’t go on too long. New Tricks is on the Drama channel at 10 and I don’t want to miss the first few minutes. If I were Sunak I would try to turn it into a Q&A in which he asks questions of Starmer that he feels might hold off the invading Faragists. What is a woman, Keir? Do you think people can afford all your greenery? Will you rule out raising every conceivable tax? It will be desperate stuff but desperate measures are what a desperate man needs. Starmer has no real need to go beyond prepared lines. No new tricks.
Tim Bale: What questions would you ask of Sunak if you were Starmer, if only to return fire?
Philip Collins: Are you still here? Don’t you think you should have waited a couple of months? What’s the weather doing in Palo Alto?
Matthew d’Ancona: Props to the first to make a good milkshake-based intervention.
Tim Bale: Still time for them to practice smiling like Boris apparently (no, really).
Moya Lothian-McLean: I’m going to be interested in seeing viewing figures after the debate—we’ve heard lots about voter apathy (or complacency, depending who you're supporting!) this election but some politics programme runners have told me their viewing figures have had an election boost. In an ideal world, these debates would see some forward-thinking policy introduced and discussed that actually provokes a bit of hope that either leader has a vision of rebuilding Britain that bears any resemblance to the real issues impacting the quality of life here. But I imagine it will be the same old tired lines. Drink if you hear mention of toolmakers or pharmacists.
Tomorrow, our panel will be back to answer yet more burning questions about the general election.
