Keir Starmer outlines ambition for Britain and says ‘most reasonable people’ want what Labour wants for country – UK politics live | Politics

Ben Quinn

A cross party group of MPs have asked parliament’s justice select committee to investigate why British prosecutors dissuaded Swedish counterparts from abandoning attempts to extradite Julian Assange.

“Numerous questions” need to be answered about the role of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) when it came to the legal pursuit of the WikiLeaks founder by Swedish authorities, according to a letter by the MPs, John McDonnell, David Davis, Caroline Lucas and Jeremy Corbyn.

The intervention comes as a four-year legal saga surrounding US attempts to extradite Assange could enter their final phase next Monday when the court of appeal rules on whether or not to accept US assurances on how he will be treated if sent across the Atlantic.

The MPs point to emails released under the Freedom of Information Act to the Italian investigative journalist, Stefania Maurizi. They indicate that the Swedish authorities were eager to give up the case four years before they formally abandoned proceedings in 2017 and that the CPS dissuaded them from doing so. Other emails which the CPS should have retained were also deleted.

In their letter to Sir Bob Neil, Chair of the justice select committee, the MPs argue that the records released under FoI provide evidence that the Crown Prosecution Service helped create what they desribed as a “legal paralysis and diplomatic quagmire” surrounding Assange. They say:

Given the significance of the case of Julian Assange in relation to journalistic freedoms and the widespread public interest in the case, it is critically important that all the public bodies dealing with the case are seen to be acting in the public interest and acting appropriately.

That could easily have been a formal general election campaign launch, and in so far as it served as a de facto campaign launch, Labour will view it as a success. It is rare for any political event aimed at the media to last more than an hour (they assume, rightly, that journalists have short attention spans), but this one zipped along nicely and after more than 90 minutes it still wasn’t gettting dull. We did not get anything new in terms of policy, and all the detail about the pledges (or “first “steps” as Labour calls them, at the risk of making Starmer sound like a todder) was released under embargo yesterday. But there were two significant reveals.

First, the endorsements. No one will admit that they are going to change the way they vote just because X said they should, but endorsements can matter a lot because they signal to voters the X is a safe choice. Neil Basu used to be a very senior office in the Metropolitan police, and appears on the media a lot, and yet he has never endorsed Labour so obviously in the past. His appearance today was a surprise. But the more significant endorsement was from Seb James, the Boots CEO. He is not just head of a leading British business. As my colleague Jessica Elgot points out, he is (or at least was?) a very close friend of David Cameron’s.

Second, the positioning. Many of the questions from the media were about the pledges not being ambitious or leftwing enough, and Starmer responded quite confidently. His argument was that they were just a start, and that there was more to come. What was striking, though, was that he seems unperturbed by this line of attack, and that is because it reinforces what seems to be the more important message he wants to convey – that Labour is now firmly aligned with mainstream public opinion. (See 11.34am.) That is where he wants to be because that is where he thinks parties win elections.

In his foreward to the 1997 manifesto Tony Blair said “New Labour is the political arm of none other than the British people as a whole.” Starmer has dropped the term “New Labour”, but otherwise his message this morning was much the same (although expressed in less hubristic language).

And the contrast with the Conservative party’s main campaign event this week was striking. Starmer’s speech was more impressive than Rishi Sunak’s on Monday, and it is hard to imagine the Tories unveiling any surprise endorsements during the election campaign likely to impress the media.

The launch went down well with journalists. This is what some of them are saying.

From my colleague Jessica Elgot

This is – by some measure – the most impressive event this Labour leadership has ever assembled. Guests inc CEO of Boots, senior counter terror officer, a terminal cancer patient… each one linked to a key offer to the public.

It’s a big contrast to Sunak’s speech on Monday..

Sunak’s speech was at a Westminster thinktank, watched only by journalists and Tory MPs and was overshadowed by a minor minister who was (inexplicably) speaking at the same time about banning lanyards she doesn’t like.

From Beth Rigby from Sky News

Labour’s ’first steps’ campaign event at a GE-style rally. Six pledges. Starmer on stage using each guest that’s spoken at the event to try to hammer home the message of “change”. Change change change on repeat

From the Telegraph’s Ben Riley-Smith

This Labour pledge card launch feels like a mini party conference. Key shad cab ministers speaking. Endorsements. Big stage festooned with slogans. Very different feel to Rishi Sunak’s think tank campaign framing speech on Monday.

From James Ball from the New European

The contrast is quite stark – it’s not just that Sunak’s delivery lacked any energy, but the whole framing of the speech was enervating. It was in London, at a think tank, with no guests or anything to mark it.

From Jack Elsom from the Sun

Aside from the massive land grab on traditional Tory turf, it’s really notable how much Starmer has developed as a public speaker in the past few years. I went to the initial missions launch early last year and it’s just another level.

But Elsom was not impressed by Starmer’s answer to his question about sex education.

Starmer dodges question over whether he would keep or scrap the govt’s new sex education guidance, including the ban on teaching of gender identity.

Says he hasn’t looked at it yet, despite leading news agenda for days…

From Zoë Grünewald from the Lead

Starmer says his initial 2023 missions still apply, but these steps are the ‘first downpayments’ or ‘initial deliverables’ on those. I wonder if people will distinguish the difference. Because there is a danger it looks like he’s scaling back.

Aside from that, I think a decent speech well delivered. But notably missing building, tackling poverty and worker’s rights. A lot of people want to hear about housing. I’ll be on @bbc5live to talk about it shortly.

Q: Why did you not include housing and employment rights in the pledges? And can the public expect to see these policies make a difference to their lives after two terms of a Labour government?

Starmer says the answer to the second question is yes.

And, on the first question, he says these are first steps. They do not detract from the other missions already announced by the party.

It is the final question he is answering, and he concludes with a message.

I’ll just finish with this because I feel it so strongly. And I say this whichever political party anyone supports …

If you take these 14 years, to leave your country in a worse state, after 14 years, than you found it is unforgivable in politics, which ever party you support.

I fundamentally believe that, and I’m not prepared to see a Labour government that doesn’t materially improve our country so that we could genuinely look back in five or 10 years’ time and say, ‘Do you know what? It is better now than it was?’

Q: Two weeks ago some of Labour’s traditional voters abandoned the party because of issues like Gaza. How will you win them back?

Starmer says the local elections showed the party can win anywhere.

He says he is offering a decade of national renewal. You don’t have to be “tribally Labour” to want things to improve for your family. He thinks most people want that.

He says he genuinely thinks “most reasonable, tolerant people” in the country wants what Labour wants for Britain.

I genuinely think that most reasonable, tolerant people in this country – and that’s the vast majority – do want to see … their country move forward.

Starmer is now taking questions.

Q: [From Sky’s Beth Rigby] Why are you scaling back on your ambitions?

Starmer says he is not doing that.

He says he is following his strategy. First, change the Labour party. Second, expose the government as incompetent, “ably assisted by some of the their prime ministers”.

And next he wants to show people how he will change the country.

These are just first steps, he says. They are a “downpayment” on the missions he has already set out.

The missions are still there, he says.

So this approach is consistent with his strategy.