DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Perils of pandering to sectarian politics trends now
No prizes for guessing the most compelling political message delivered in last week's council elections. Unfortunately, it was also a lie.
This was an image of the Prime Minister, next to his signature, accompanied by the words: 'Do you think working people deserve a retirement? Rishi Sunak doesn't. Want to keep your pension? Don't risk it with Rishi Sunak. Vote Labour.'
And many millions did (though for plenty of other reasons, besides).
This cruel fiction was justified by Labour on the grounds that the Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, said the Conservatives have a long-term plan to remove the tax known as National Insurance. And many people imagine that the money raised by this goes directly and solely to provide the state pension.
In fact, as Alex Brummer pointed out in the Mail: 'The cash raised on payroll from employers and employees goes straight into the Exchequer; it is just another form of income tax, imposed exclusively on workers. In the UK there is no tradition of ring-fenced taxes.'
Labour advert featuring Rishi Sunak - 'Do you think working people deserve a retirement? Rishi Sunak doesn't. Want to keep your pension?
The poster was justified by Labour on the grounds that the Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, said the Conservatives have a long-term plan to remove the tax known as National Insurance
Moreover, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, £138 billion will be spent on the state pension this year, over three times more than the total raised by National Insurance contributions.
Keir Starmer and his team understand all this, which is why I described their claim as a lie — defined as a false statement known to be untrue by the person saying it.
The best that can be said is that this deliberately dishonest social media campaign was less lurid than the 'attack ad' Labour put out during the local election campaign last year.
That used exactly the same image of Rishi Sunak, with his signature, next to the words: 'Do you think adults convicted of sexually assaulting children should go to prison? Rishi Sunak doesn't.'
This attempt to portray Sunak as the paedophiles' pal was based on the numbers of such offenders who did not serve jail-time since 2010 (when the Conservatives have been in office).
In fact, Sunak was not even an MP for part of that period and, as it happens, Sir Keir Starmer, as the former Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), was on the sentencing council for a number of those years.
The former Labour Home Secretary Lord (David) Blunkett was one of a number of the party's most experienced figures to express their revulsion. Blunkett said he had been left 'close to despair' by what he termed the 'deeply offensive' advertisements.
But as the Sunday Times noted at the time: 'Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first [of these ads put out on Twitter] has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory.'
Starmer is a man who, by all accounts, behaves with decency and kindness in his personal life. But he is also a football fanatic, and applies to politics the ethics of professional football — which is that the dirtiest of tricks can be excused if it brings victory to your side. But if the other side does the same, that is outrageous and unacceptable.
And it seems the Labour leader is still furious at the way, during a Commons debate in February 2022, the then Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that, as DPP, Starmer had spent the majority of his time 'prosecuting journalists and not prosecuting Jimmy Savile, as far as I can make out'.
In fact, Starmer, while head of the DPP, was not involved in the (non) charging decisions in 2009 over Savile, though later he apologised for
