Labour’s manifesto should not have been a surprise. Nothing new was announced. Instead, it is a 136-page collation of the policies – which have been abundant, whatever critics say – that Labour has announced over the past two years. The tone, content and message are familiar: the country is broken; Labour will fix it. This predictability reveals the key fact about this election: that the result was decided long before by Labour’s wily manoeuvres and the Conservatives’ self-immolation. For the first time, a poll last night had Reform beating the Tories. I naively thought the Conservatives would feign unity and professionalism once Rishi Sunak called an election because it would determine whether they were employed or not. But even self-preservation, that ...

With the publication of Labour’s manifesto, Scotland now has a clearer idea of what a change of government at Westminster will mean for Holyrood. Keir Starmer is promising improved relations between the two parliaments. The SNP and the Conservatives have been at loggerheads – often deliberately – for most of the past 14 years. This has played its part in driving up support for independence and further loosening the weakened bonds of British identity. Starmer knows that one metric his term in office will be judged on is the re-strengthening of those bonds. He hopes Labour will take office in Edinburgh at the next devolved election in 2026, which would make his task considerably easier, but he can’t rely on that happening. ...

Some party manifestos are presented as literary or philosophical works. Labour’s 2024 general election manifesto, launched at the Co-Op HQ in Manchester, does not fall into these categories. Its front cover, emblazoned with a black-and-white photo of a sober Keir Starmer, features a single word: “Change”. As titles go, it won’t win prizes for originality.  But do not confuse this with an absence of substance. The “slim document” that some in Labour spoke of has proved to be 23,000 words long (the Starmer project’s problem has never been a lack of policy).  Those looking for surprises will be disappointed – the party has learned from Theresa May’s ill-fated social care plan (the “dementia tax”), sprung on an unsuspecting electorate in 2017. John ...

Do working-class heroes still exist? Judging by how Keir Starmer carved out his personal brand on Sky News's leaders' special last night, Labour’s speechwriters certainly think so. The campaign is trundling on, and those playing “drink every time Starmer drops a class-conscious cliché” may find themselves inebriated for much of June. Once again, the Labour leader reminded us that his dad was a toolmaker, though he didn't get round to telling us his mum’s phone was cut off, and he was the first in his family to go to university. For a knight of the realm, and the man once rumoured to have inspired the ultimate Noughties middle-class dreamboat, Mark Darcy, this kind of forced relatability is an essential strategy. Faced ...

In a general election, head to head is best: but only when one of the heads belongs to an experienced interviewer. After the uninformative ITV “debate” between Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak, Sky and Beth Rigby did far better in Grimsby, rather brutally exposing the strengths and weaknesses of both men. Initial polling confirmed a general impression that the Labour leader easily outperformed the prime minister. I felt the same. But neither man came away unscathed. With the Defence Secretary Grant Shapp's warnings of a Labour “supermajority” earlier in the day and the revelation that one Tory candidate, Andrea Jenkyns, is campaigning with pictures of Nigel Farage, not the PM, on her literature, it really does feel like the end of days ...

Here’s one thing we learned from tonight’s leaders' event in Grimsby: a journalistic grilling followed by questions from the public is more revealing than a head-to-head debate where candidates can hide behind insulting each other. Both Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak had a torrid time – both will currently be nursing bruises and agonising over awkward exchanges they wish had gone better. Keir Starmer had the dubious honour of going first. He turned up with one aim: don’t look weak. Clearly he had learned from last week’s debate against Rishi Sunak - in which the prime minister managed to repeat his claim that Labour would raise taxes by £2,000 per household multiple times almost without challenge. Maybe he was still smarting from ...

“What did you go without as a child? Can you give me an example?” It seemed that ITV’s interviewer, Paul Brand, would not be satisfied until the Prime Minister had taken off his jacket, rolled up his sleeves and pointed out the forearm scars he acquired fixing the factory loom as a child labourer. The PM has previously responded that, yes he’s wealthy, but that doesn’t matter: it’s about values and policies. To misquote Portia, the quality of empathy is not strained. It appeared to be a manful stand against the American import of backstory politics, in which public figures scramble around for evidence they have struggled, an expectation that leads to much awkward boasting, as with the inevitable Sunak blunder. ...

The Conservative manifesto, launched yesterday, was fantastical in two senses. First, it depends on incredible calculations. As Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies noted, it combines definite costs (£17bn of tax cuts, £6bn more for defence) with highly uncertain savings (a £12bn reduction in the disability benefit bill). But second, there is no prospect of the Tories forming the next government. This was pure political simulation. For that reason, the most significant campaign event yesterday was Rachel Reeves’ press conference at Savoy Place in central London. The shadow chancellor presented journalists with a dossier alleging that the Conservatives’ plans would add £4,800 to a typical mortgage by raising interest rates. But it was Reeves’ own policies that were rightly the focus ...