From Rishi Sunak, we saw the good, the bad and the ugly during the latest TV election showdown with other party leaders – and a tough and unforgiving audience.
The good came when he broke his silence on the Tory betting scandal early on in his half-hour session of questions, declaring he was “incredibly angry” and vowing that any law breakers would be “booted out” of his party.
The bad followed when he struggled to defend his own policy on national service for 18-year-olds and was tetchy with an audience member who asked about Brexit.
And the ugly came at the end when the audience angrily shouted “shame!” when he launched into Reform UK-style rhetoric about the European Convention on Human Rights and attacked what he called a “foreign court”.
That sort of talk may play well with right-wing MPs and activists, but it bombed here and will have alienated those voters thinking of switching to Labour or the Liberal Democrats.
So Mr Sunak started well, got bogged down in detail in the middle and then ended badly, though he eventually did manage to land some blows on Labour on tax – as he has continued to do so throughout the election campaign.
The two takeaways from the PM’s part of this election programme will be his threat to expel betting wrongdoers and his misjudging the audience on the ECHR.
More on Conservatives
Related Topics:
But not surprisingly, that wasn’t good enough for opposition MPs.
Image: Rishi Sunak faced tough questions from the audience
Image: Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was challenged on a number of issues by the audience.
Immediately after the programme, Labour’s Jonathan Ashworth told Sky News Mr Sunak still has not taken any action against Tory candidates Craig Williams and Laura Saunders, who are being investigated by the Gambling Commission.
Advertisement
He should have suspended them immediately, as Sir Keir Starmer has demanded, Mr Ashworth said.
But despite the shouts of “shame!” from the audience on the ECHR near the end, Mr Sunak will feel that with the Tories losing votes to Nigel Farage he had to throw the Tory right and would-be Reform UK voters some red meat.
Those Tory MPs who love to hate the ECHR will no doubt have approved of Mr Sunak’s attack as far as it went – and no doubt accuse the BBC of selecting a “lefty” audience.
Before Mr Sunak, Sir Keir stumbled once again, as he did in his interview with Beth Rigby in last week’s Sky News Battle for No 10 programme in Grimsby, when asked about his support for Jeremy Corbyn.
Host Fiona Bruce repeatedly challenged Sir Keir on why he said Mr Corbyn would make a great prime minister in 2019, but the Labour leader kept dodging the question and looked shifty.
Eventually, Sir Keir said, rather lamely, that Mr Corbyn would have made a better prime minister than Boris Johnson.
Image: Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer
Tories will no doubt taunt him on that claim for the rest of the campaign.
Sir Keir’s other tricky moments came when he was quizzed about his dispute with Labour MP Rosie Duffield on trans issues.
“I agree with Tony Blair,” he said. But he shunned the Canterbury MP and couldn’t bring himself to mention her name.
That was disrespectful. The Labour leader seems to have a problem with Ms Duffield. It makes him sound intolerant, which his critics would say is fair criticism.
The surprise here was a solid performance from the SNP leader John Swinney. He is less confrontational than the party’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn.
Image: Scotland First Minister John Swinney
He has a funereal style of delivery that has previously seen him compared to an undertaker.
He could also be compared to a Church of Scotland priest reading from the prayer book, to be fair.
But he’s an old pro and a details man, as he demonstrated when answering tricky questions about the SNP performance on the NHS in Scotland and was courteous with members of the audience, even when the questions were tough.
It all began with Sir Ed Davey, who was immediately greeted with the question: “Aren’t you going to bankrupt the country?”
“No,” he replied.
Well, it would have been a shock if he’d said yes.
Image: Lib Dem leader Ed Davey fielding questions from the audience
The second questioner was applauded after he accused Sir Ed of breaking promises in coalition government, citing the Lib Dems’ U-turn on tuition fees.
He was also ridiculed by a member of the audience over his “horseplay” in the campaign, the stunts such as splashing around on Lake Windemere and riding on a rollercoaster at Thorpe Park in Surrey.
And inevitably, he was asked if he was proud of his record as Post Office minister during the Horizon scandal.
The questions were tough, but he dealt with them calmly. His style was that of a fireside chat.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Without localized risk detection and public–private cooperation, illicit capital will continue to flow unchecked, and trust in the system will collapse.
Thousands more Afghan nationals may have been affected by another data breach, the government has said.
Up to 3,700 Afghans brought to the UK between January and March 2024 have potentially been impacted as names, passport details and information from the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy has been compromised again, this time by a breach on a third party supplier used by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
This was not an attack directly on the government but a cyber security incident on a sub-contractor named Inflite – The Jet Centre – an MoD supplier that provides ground handling services for flights at London Stansted Airport.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:34
July: UK spies exposed in Afghan data breach
The flights were used to bring Afghans to the UK, travel to routine military exercises, and official engagements. It was also used to fly British troops and government officials.
Those involved were informed of it on Friday afternoon by the MoD, marking the second time information about Afghan nationals relocated to the UK has been compromised.
It is understood former Tory ministers are also affected by the hack.
Earlier this year, it emerged that almost 7,000 Afghan nationals would have to be relocated to the UK following a massive data breach by the British military that successive governments tried to keep secret with a super-injunction.
Defence Secretary John Healey offered a “sincere apology” for the first data breach in a statement to the House of Commons, saying he was “deeply concerned about the lack of transparency” around the data breach, adding: “No government wishes to withhold information from the British public, from parliamentarians or the press in this manner.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:57
July: Afghan interpreter ‘betrayed’ by UK govt
The previous Conservative government set up a secret scheme in 2023 to relocate Afghan nationals impacted by the data breach, but who were not eligible for an existing programme to relocate and help people who had worked for the British government in Afghanistan.
The mistake exposed personal details of close to 20,000 individuals, endangering them and their families, with as many as 100,000 people impacted in total.
A government spokesperson said of Friday’s latest breach: “We were recently notified that a third party sub-contractor to a supplier experienced a cyber security incident involving unauthorised access to a small number of its emails that contained basic personal information.
“We take data security extremely seriously and are going above and beyond our legal duties in informing all potentially affected individuals. The incident has not posed any threat to individuals’ safety, nor compromised any government systems.”
In a statement, Inflite – The Jet Centre confirmed the “data security incident” involving “unauthorised access to a limited number of company emails”.
“We have reported the incident to the Information Commissioner’s Office and have been actively working with the relevant UK cyber authorities, including the National Crime Agency and the National Cyber Security Centre, to support our investigation and response,” it said.
“We believe the scope of the incident was limited to email accounts only, however, as a precautionary measure, we have contacted our key stakeholders whose data may have been affected during the period of January to March 2024.”