Chris Mason
Political editor

The UK’s official statistics regulator is looking into a claim the Conservatives are making about the tax burden families could face if Labour wins the general election.

The Office for Statistics Regulation - which is the independent regulatory arm of the UK Statistics Authority - is exploring the veracity or otherwise of the Tory claim that Labour tax rises would amount to just over £2,000 over four years per working household.

It isn’t known precisely how long its investigation will take.

When an inquiry is complete, its conclusion becomes public, as the OSR publishes any correspondence it sends to those who have been complained about.

Katy Austin
Transport correspondent

The Liberal Democrats say they will commit to freeze regulated rail fares next year, in their manifesto.

The party also committed to a freeze at the 2019 election. The BBC reported they said it would cost £1.6bn over five years.

Today, the Lib Dems say a freeze on regulated rail fares - including seasons tickets, anytime and off-peak tickets - for 2025-26 is expected to cost around £115m.

The party claims their analysis of published data shows commuters in some areas have forked out an extra £1,100 in rail fares since 2019.

Setting regulated rail fares is a devolved matter. The usual formula for England's annual fare rise used to be an increase in January based on the previous July's RPI measure of inflation +1%.

But for the past couple of years, fares in England and Wales have risen in March instead, and the increase has been lower than July RPI. The most recent rise was 4.9% in March 2024.

From 1st April 2024, Scotrail fares in Scotland increased by 8.7%. The Conservatives and Labour have been contacted to confirm their approach.

Lorna Gordon
Scotland correspondent, reporting from Linlithgow

SNP supporter Anne-Marie Barclay tells me the issue of voter ID comes up repeatedly on the doorstep.

Barclay says when she’s been out canvassing, older women in particular seem puzzled and “don’t know what you are talking about” when they are told they need ID to exercise their electoral franchise.

She explains they have come across 50 or 60 older women in the Linlithgow area alone who no longer have a passport and choose instead to holiday in Scotland and who say their husband does all the driving.

Barclay is worried, she says, about a generation who are not “necessarily computer savvy or read stuff online”.

Context: People will have to show valid photo ID at polling stations when voting in the general election on 4 July. Click here for a detailed explainer about voter ID.

In Scotland, Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes has also been giving her reaction to last night's debate - questioning why neither candidate mentioned Scotland.

Forbes, visiting Maisie Gray Pottery and Crafts in Linlithgow, says that's why Scotland needs SNP MPs.

"To hold Labour or the Tories' feet to the fire and remind them not to forget about Scotland."

Stephen Flynn, the SNP's Westminster leader, made the same point earlier today.

Rajini Vaidyanathan
Reporting from Leigh, Greater Manchester

I'm visiting some of the so-called red wall seats to get a sense of how last night's debate between Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer was received. These are solid Labour constituencies which went Conservative at the 2019 election.

Many are seen as key battlegrounds, like here in the new constituency of Leigh and Atherton. At a Coffee Bar in Leigh, not everyone watched the head-to-head. Regular Maurice "had other things on" - but he did catch the highlights.

Usually a Conservative, votes like his are key if the party wants to retain this seat which they took from Labour five years ago. (The seat has somewhat changed due to boundary changes.)

Maurice says he's "probably" going to vote for the Conservatives but is also weighing up the Reform Party, as someone who favoured Brexit. "Reform is representative of ground level working class voters," he tells me.

Meanwhile, Linda - who has run the cafe Maurice was in for years - did watch the debate. She felt it wasn't clear what either leader was going to do, if elected. That said, she's opting for Labour and says her priority is getting more police on the streets around here.

"Crime and law and order matter to me," she says, adding that she mourns the loss of industry in the area and the demise of the high street, with so many shops closing.

And let's not forget those here who are disillusioned with politics altogether. Taxi driver Peter says he won't be voting on 4 July - "I don't think it'll make a difference, they don't help us."

Tomos Morgan
Wales correspondent

Image source, Reuters

In Wales, Vaughan Gething looks set to lose the vote of no confidence in his leadership in the Senedd later today.

The Conservatives called the vote after weeks of criticism, including some in Labour, of the donations to the first minister's leadership campaign.

With the Senedd evenly split between the opposition and his party, the first minister needs the whole Labour group to back him - but Vikki Howells, the chair of the Labour group of MSs, has said two members are off sick and unable to vote for him.

Gething would not stand down if he lost, Howell said, adding that it was a "gimmick" and for the "voting public to decide who is in the Senedd".

The vote is non-binding, meaning the FM would not have to stand down if he lost. But a defeat would be a blow to his authority, especially during a UK general election campaign.

Sam Hancock
Live reporter

Forget questions like "who won?" or "did you see that bit when...?" - it's tax that has dominated post-debate conversation this morning.

Specifically, it's a row between Labour and the Conservatives over a claim Rishi Sunak repeatedly made last night that, if elected, Labour would increase taxes by £2,000. Even more specifically, it's a row over where Sunak said the figures came from - "independent Treasury officials".

Keir Starmer called it "garbage" during the pair's first head-to-head of the election campaign and there's been a lot of back and forth today - including a letter, seen by the BBC, showing the most senior Treasury official distancing his department from it.

If you're just joining us (hello), or if you need a recap (always a good idea after a busy morning, I think), I'd suggest reading our round-up post from a little earlier.

We're now going to turn our attention to what's happening elsewhere around the country - as candidates continue along the campaign trail.

David Wallace Lockhart
Political correspondent

Labour’s shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has accused the prime minister of lying about Labour’s tax plans in the televised debate on Tuesday.

Speaking on a visit to a deli in Glasgow, Reeves says: “The prime minister lied in the debate last night. Labour has no plans to increase taxes on working people.”

She reiterates that Labour has ruled out an increase in income tax, national insurance and VAT: “The truth is it’s the Conservatives who have taken the tax burden to the highest it’s been in 70 years."

Asked why Keir Starmer had not used the letter to rebut Rishi Sunak’s attacks last night, she says the Labour leader was “really clear” that what the prime minister said was “utter garbage” - and adds: “I don’t think Keir Starmer expected the prime minister to lie in the debate last night”.

Earlier, a Conservative spokesperson told the BBC's Henry Zeffman the party had been "fair to Labour in the production of the Labour's tax rise briefing note and used only clear Labour policies, their own costings or official HMT costings using the lowest assumptions".

Image source, Reuters

What happened on the TV debate last night?

Rishi Sunak repeatedly claimed people would pay around £2,000 more in tax if Labour wins the election. He said that figure had been calculated by "independent Treasury officials".

Sir Keir Starmer called it "garbage".

Where did the figure come from?

The Conservatives have been using the figure for some time.

To arrive at it, Conservative Party officials relied in part on Treasury estimates of what Labour policies might cost to deliver and then worked out how much extra taxation might be needed to pay for them.

However, we already knew that ministers' efforts to present it as independent analysis were disputed because political advisers have a role in the underlying assumptions and then draw up the final calculations.

On top of that, neither Labour or the Tories have actually set out their full plans for after the election yet.

What has happened this morning?

The row over the £2,000 figure deepened this morning when the BBC obtained a letter revealing the most senior official in the Treasury has distanced his department from the figure.

In a letter responding to a query from Labour's Darren Jones, the official said the Conservatives were wrong to present the calculations as having been produced by the civil service, and said he had spoken to ministers about his concerns.

Where does that leave us?

Labour responded by saying Sunak told a "desperate lie" and likened his behaviour to Boris Johnson's conduct during the partygate scandal.

However, less than an hour after the BBC revealed the letter, Sunak repeated the headline figure, saying on X, external: "Keir Starmer’s tax rises will cost working families £2,094."

And in a post in the last half hour, , externalhe repeated that headline figure - although did not mention what it was based on.

The Conservatives' claim that a Labour government would raise taxes by £2,000 is under the microscope this morning. So what does the leading economic research group, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, have to say?

"We don't know what either party will do on tax over the next Parliament," says IFS director Paul Johnson, adding that there are several things worth noting.

"First, both appear to be committed to one substantial tax rise, that is freezing personal tax allowances and thresholds for the next three years. That will raise £11 billion per year.

"Second, the £2,000 per working household that the Conservatives are suggesting that Labour is committed to is not independently arrived at or verified. It has been calculated based on Conservative Party assumptions about Labour's spending plans. It is also worth saying that it is cumulated over four years.

"Third and most importantly, it looks more likely than not that either party would need to raise taxes if they want to avoid serious spending cuts and meet the fiscal rules to which they have both signed up."

Fact-checking Tories' £2,000 Labour claimpublished at 10:31 British Summer Time 5 June

10:31 BST 5 June

The Conservatives have come up with the claim that Labour would "cost working families £2,094" - in speeches, they tend to round it down to £2,000 - by adding up how much they claim Labour’s spending plans would cost, and dividing this by the number of UK households with at least one person working.

The overall figure is £38.5bn - over the next four years - which Labour disputes.

The Conservatives say the costings have been worked out by impartial civil servants, but some doubt has been cast on that this morning.

For example, one costing looks at Labour’s plan to have more services provided by the state instead of by private companies and it assumes that private companies are always 7.5% more efficient. But the civil servants doing the costings warned about the use of that figure.

And, remember, we won’t know exactly what Labour’s policies are - and how they will be funded - until we see their manifesto, which has not yet been published.

• Read more here

We mentioned in our last post that Rishi Sunak had been on X this morning - here's a bit more on that.

Just before 09:00 BST, the prime minister wrote: "It couldn’t have been clearer in last night’s debate. Keir Starmer’s tax rises will cost working families £2,094."

There was no mention this time around of where the figures come from, but it is the tenth time in the past 24 hours that he's posted about Labour's tax plans - and the fourth time he's mentioned the £2,000 figure.

Meanwhile, Claire Coutinho, his energy secretary, spoke to BBC Breakfast earlier and repeated much of what Sunak said last night. She said the costings came from independent civil servants who wouldn't put anything "dodgy" in their estimates.

She also claimed the quoted figures had been "signed off by the permanent secretary of the Treasury" - that's James Bowler, who we've now seen wrote a letter to Labour two days ago saying the Conservatives' assessment of their tax plans "should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service".

You can watch that moment here:

Pat McFadden, Labour's national campaign co-ordinator, has given his verdict after the BBC saw a letter from the top Treasury civil servant which said the Conservatives' assessment of Labour's tax plans "should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service".

"There you have it. Rishi Sunak’s claim on tax categorically untrue," he says in a post on X. "Desperate claim utterly disowned."

Labour's shadow health secretary Wes Streeting also responded, saying: "Rishi Sunak lied to you. He’s sent his ministers out to lie to you. They were told not to lie to you. You can’t believe a word they say."

The letter risks undermining Rishi Sunak’s claim in Tuesday evening's head-to-head debate that Labour’s plans would mean £2,000 of tax rises per working household. He's posted on X since then, repeating the claim.

Image source, PA Media/ITV

So, Labour has accused Rishi Sunak of lying in last night's TV debate, on the back of the prime minister's claim that independent civil servants have costed Labour's plans and come to the conclusion that they would require a £2,000 tax rise over the next Parliament.

We've since reported on a letter from a top civil servant which casts doubt on that claim - though the Conservatives seem to be sticking to their guns.

But what exactly did Sunak say?

During the ITV debate, addressing the possibility of a Labour government, the Conservative leader said: "There are £2,000 worth of tax rises coming for every working family in this country."

Later in the debate, Sunak added: "Independent Treasury officials have costed Labour's policies and they amount to a £2,000 tax rise for every working family." Starmer did not directly respond to the point at the time.

Later, when the debate turned to focus specifically on tax and spending plans, Sunak said again: "Independent Treasury civil servants have costed Labour's policies and it's £2,000."

"Absolute nonsense", Starmer could be heard saying, also telling the audience at one point: "They put in pretend Labour policies to the Treasury and then they get a false readout."

Then about 50 minutes into the debate, during the section on climate change, Starmer tried to refute the point again, saying: "This £2,000 he keeps saying it's going to cost is absolute garbage, we won't go into the details of it."

In our last couple of posts, we've been reporting on a letter sent by James Bowler - the chief Treasury civil servant - to Labour two days ago, saying that the Conservatives' assessment of their tax plans shouldn't be "presented as having been produced by the civil service".

It was released this morning after the head-to-head debate between Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer last night, in which the prime minister repeatedly said Labour's spending plans would result in a £2,000 tax rise over four years - and attributed the figures to "independent Treasury officials".

Here's what the letter, addressed to shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones, says in full:

Henry Zeffman
Chief political correspondent

Some reaction now to that bit of breaking news we just brought you.

Responding to the Treasury permanent secretary’s letter (see post below), Labour’s Jonathan Ashworth tells BBC Breakfast: "It’s a slam dunk proof of Rishi Sunak’s big desperate lie.

"That is the proof that Rishi Sunak lied. Just as Boris Johnson lied about partygate, Rishi Sunak’s lying here. It proves he’s no different, he’s no better."

A Conservative Party spokesperson said: "We were fair to Labour in the production of the Labour's tax rise briefing note and used only clear Labour policies, their own costings or official HMT costings using the lowest assumptions. For example, using Labour's figures for the spending items in the Green Prosperity Plan - using £23.7bn over four years instead of £28bn a year.

"It is now for Labour to explain which of the policies which were Labour policy no longer are Labour policy."

Henry Zeffman
Chief political correspondent

The chief Treasury civil servant wrote to Labour two days ago saying that the Conservatives’ assessment of their tax plans "should not be presented as having been produced by the civil service".

The letter from James Bowler, the Treasury permanent secretary, risks undermining Rishi Sunak’s claim in last night’s debate that Labour’s plans include £38bn of uncosted spending, which he says would mean £2,000 of tax rises per working household.

In a letter to Darren Jones, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, Bowler writes: "As you will expect, civil servants were not involved in the production or presentation of the Conservative Party’s document 'Labour’s Tax Rises' or in the calculation of the total figure used ... the £38bn figure used in the Conservative Party’s publication includes costs beyond those provided by the Civil Service".

"I agree that any costings derived from other sources or produced by other organisations should not be presented as having been produced by the Civil Service," he adds.

For context: Last night, Sunak repeatedly claimed that Labour's spending plans would result in a £2,000 tax rise for Britons - saying "independent Treasury officials have costed Labour's policies and they amount to a £2,000 tax rise for every working family".

The last bit of Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho's interview on BBC Breakfast that we'll bring you focuses on immigration - another key topic from last night's debate.

Keir Starmer has "no plan" to tackle small boat crossings, she says, despite the Labour leader's repeated pledge yesterday to "smash the gangs".

Pushed on whether the government's plan is actually working, when the number of crossings remain high, Coutinho says Rishi Sunak's "deterrent" - a reference to the Rwanda scheme - is the only way forward.

For context: Starmer has previously said he would scrap the government's Rwanda scheme "straight away" if his party wins the election - and establish a new Border Security Command to work with Border Force, MI5 and the National Crime Agency on prosecuting gangs operating small boat routes.

It's now put to Coutinho that the audience at last night's debate laughed when Sunak suggested NHS waiting lists were coming down.

Asked if lists are higher now than when Sunak became prime minister, Coutinho admits they are a "little bit higher now" - but says they're "coming down from the peak". She says the direction of travel is the important thing.

NHS waiting lists in England are "enormously difficult for people" and "too high", she goes on, but says they are coming down whereas in Labour-run Wales "the waiting lists are going up".

Right, let's get into this morning's political interviews, where no doubt the debate is going to be the main topic of conversation. Up first is Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho.

It's worrying, she tells BBC Breakfast, that Keir Starmer couldn't "rule out" a £2,000 tax rise that Rishi Sunak repeatedly claimed last night would affect working families if Labour's elected. Coutinho says the figure comes from official costings from the Treasury, but she's pulled up on the fact these figures are given to the Treasury by special advisers.

These calculations are done by independent civil servants who wouldn't put anything "dodgy in there", she responds, and adds that if anything they're "underestimating" the costings of Labour's policies.

On last night's Newsnight, the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire also pulled up Coutinho on that £2,000 figure, telling her that this figure was misleading to voters, external as the assumptions on which the calculations are based have been made by Tory special advisers, and thus not independent or impartial as the Conservatives say.

Coutinho adds this morning that it's "interesting" it took Starmer "so long" to get to his denial of the figure - but when pushed, she insists again that the costings are official and come from the Treasury and are based on Labour promises.