PMQs analysis: Another day of crime and punishment between Starmer and Sunak
If you were in any doubt as to one of the key fault lines the next election will be fought over, Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak worked hard in Prime Minister’s Questions to dispel any uncertainties.
Crime and law and order strikes a nerve across voters, regardless of which party they have voted for in the past.
In a way, it is also a peculiarly difficult one for both of them to fight.
Sunak, as Starmer has been at pains to point out, sits at the helm of a government which, after 13 years, has hardly made policing a shining star of efficiency.
Meanwhile Starmer is facing a series of questions over his tenure as Director of Public Prosecutions and his role in relaxing sentencing guidelines for peadophiles.
But all the same, the Labour leader popped out like a 3D version of the attack ad Labour HQ pumped out last week in advance of the local elections, accusing Sunak of failing to take charge of crime, and then, for good measure, adding in a jibe about his wealth.
He joked that maybe the reason Sunak couldn’t fix the justice system was because “the Prime Minister doesn’t use the same public services as the rest of us”.
Of course, because British politics is a totally normal place, Sunak’s retort was to evoke an image we all could’ve lived without, of Starmer as Mr Whippy. He taunted the Labour leader and called him “Sir Softie, soft on crime, soft on criminals”.
Predictably, CCHQ had a series of social media posts using the line ready to go the moment the words escaped Sunak’s lips.
Neither Starmer or Sunak have a sparkling record on crime, but both are betting on it as a winner in the upcoming local elections, and a general election on the horizon.
It’s an attractive policy to campaign on, because in the eyes of voters, the quick fix of “more police officers” will fix it.
Of course, the causes and types of crime police officers are dealing with are complex, and the simple answer of “more bobbies on the beat” won’t cut it in terms of a solution, but it will cut through enough to influence Brits’ ballot papers.