Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, has welcomed the conclusion of the Greater Manchester police investigation into allegations against her. (See 4.01pm.) She said the Tory complaint about her was political motivated and that the public were fed up of such “desperate tactics”.

I welcome the conclusion of the police investigation, and confirmation that no further action will be taken.

We have seen the Conservative party use this playbook before - reporting political opponents to the police during election campaigns to distract from their dire record. The public have had enough of these desperate tactics from a Tory government with nothing else to say after 14 years of failure.

I am grateful to all those who have stood by and supported me and my family. My focus now is squarely on securing the change Britain needs, with the election of a Labour government.

Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, has given sit-down interviews to various broadcasters which have just been released. Most of the questions focused on what she meant when she said earlier that Labour’s plans would not require any tax rises additional to the ones already announced by the party. (See 2.18pm.)

Andy Bell from 5 News asked about fuel duty. In theory fuel duty is supposed to go up every year (the rates are set in cash terms, and to keep their value they have to go up in line with inflation), and the Treasury plans on the basis that it will go up every year. But for most of the last 20 years or so chancellor have frozen fuel duty rather than impose an increase on motorists.

Asked if her comments about not raising taxes covered fuel duty, Reeves said:

We’ve always supported the freezes in fuel duty these last few years. And we will set that out in a budget but our track record at the last budget [shows] we were calling for that freeze and we’re pleased that the government did that.

Asked if that meant that she would continue to freeze fuel duty, she said she would not write a budget now, but added: “We’ve always been clear we’ve not supported increases in fuel duty over the last few years and you can judge us on our record.”

Sam Coates from Sky News asked Reeves, when she said her plans did not require tax rises, whether that was a statement that would apply for a whole parliament. Reeves refused to say, and she would not go beyond just repeating the point about her plans not requiring tax rises. She said she would not write a budget now.

But she confirmed that Labour has committed to not putting up income tax or national insurance – implying that her comment about taxes in general not needing to go up was not such a cast-iron commitment.

And in an interview with Christopher Hope from GB News, asked if her pledges not to raise income tax, national insurance or corporation tax (a promise from February) would cover all five years of the next parliament, she said they would.

Back at the Q&A, Keir Starmer takes a question about freedom of movement.

Q: Will you do anything on freedom of movement for goods or people?

Starmer says there was freedom of movement when the UK was in the EU, but he says it is not coming back. There is no case for saying we should go back into the EU. The referendum settled that, he says.

But he says he can see why a firm like Airbus needs to be able to send workers to plants abroad. That is not freedom of movement; that is just work, he says. And he says he wants to make it easier for that to happen than it is now. He says the Brexit deal negotiated by Boris Johnson was a “botched job”. It can be improved.

Reeves says Labour wants a better deal with the EU on veterinary regulations.

And she says Labour wants to secure touring rights for artists within the EU, so musicins going on tour don’t need to deal with the current “prohibitive and bureaucratic” rules.

And she says the Brexit deal did little for the sevice sector. She suggests she would like to improve that.

Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, are taking part in a Q&A at an Airbus plan in Hertfordshire. Opening the session, Starmer makes a point of saying questioners are not being vetted and anyone can ask anything.

The first question comes from someone who says he has not voted Labour before. That’s allowed, Starmer says. The questioner asks if Labour will eliminate waste in government procurement.

Starmer says he thinks the government could do more to use procurement as a means of generating growth.

Reeves is speaking now. She says Labour has committed not to increase income tax or national insurance at all.

She says she is particulary angry about the money wasted on Covid contracts. She would appoint a commissioner to get every penny back where contracts were not fulfilled.

This is the second time a police inquiry into Labour launched at the behest of the Tories has gone nowhere.

In the so-called beergate affair, Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner were accused of breaking lockdown rules after Starmer was photographed drinking beer in an office with Labour staff when they had a takeaway meal while working late during the local election campaign in 2021. Starmer and Rayner said they would resign if they were found to have done anything wrong. An inquiry by Durham police concluded that they hadn’t.

The allegations received extensive coverage, particularly in the Daily Mail, and the Conservative MP Richard Holden was particularly prominent in demanding a full investigation. He was later promoted and appointed Conservative party chair.

James Daly, the current deputy chair, was instrumental in persuading Greater Manchester police to carry out a full inquiry into the various allegations about Rayner. These allegations, also reported endlessly by the Mail, were prompted by revelations about Rayner’s living arrangements when she bought her first house published in a biography by Lord Ashcroft, who is a former Tory deputy chair. When Greater Manchester police initially decided the complaints weren’t worth investigating, Daly complained.

The Tories pushed the the beergate story when Boris Johnson was under pressure over Partygate, and they clearly wanted to imply equivalance; that lockdown rules were being ignored by people from all parties.

But the police inquiry into Partygate did lead to action. Some 83 people were fined, including Boris Johnson, the then PM, and Rishi Sunak, the then chancellor.

Greater Manchester police has said that it is not taking any further action over allegations that Angela Rayner, the deputy Labour leader, broke the law after she bought a council home which she subsequently sold before becoming an MP.

Tories and Tory-supported papers suggested that she may have broken electoral law, by registering the wrong home as her main residence, as well as suggesting that she wrongly avoided paying capital gains tax when she sold the property. James Daly, the Tory deputy chair, complained to the police, and then insisted that they looked into it properly when they initially dismissed the allegations, even though in interviews he subsequently refused to say what he thought she had done wrong.

A spokesperson said:

Following allegations about Angela Rayner MP, Greater Manchester police has completed a thorough, carefully considered and proportionate investigation. We have concluded that no further police action will be taken.

The investigation originated from complaints made by Mr James Daly MP directly to GMP. Subsequent further contact with GMP by members of the public, and claims made by individuals featured in media reporting, indicated a strong public interest in the need for allegations to be investigated.

Matters involving council tax and personal tax do not fall into the jurisdiction of policing. GMP has liaised with Stockport council and information about our investigation has been shared with them. Details of our investigation have also been shared with His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

A BBC News presenter has apologised after she accused Nigel Farage of using “customary inflammatory language”, PA Media reports. PA says:

Geeta Guru-Murthy made the comment after a clip of Farage speaking at a Reform UK event in Dover was shown on BBC News, before later apologising and saying this “didn’t meet the BBC’s editorial standards on impartiality”.

Farage, Reform’s honorary president, said he was quoting the Polish prime minister Donald Tusk when he said “aggressive young males” were coming into Poland.

Live on air, Guru-Murthy said: “Earlier today we heard live from Nigel Farage, speaking at that election event we just saw.

“When we came away from his live speech, I used language to describe it which didn’t meet the BBC’s editorial standards on impartiality. I’d like to apologise to Mr Farage and viewers for this.”

In a post on X, Farage tagged Guru-Murthy and asked: “What happened to impartiality?”

Lee Anderson, the former Tory MP who defected to Reform UK, responded by saying the BBC licence fee should be abolished.

During her Q&A this morning Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, said she did not think Labour would need to raise taxes beyond the ones already announced by the party (like the more substantial windfall tax on firms and VAT on school fees). (See 10.52am.)

In response to a question about whether further tax rises might be needed, she replied:

In terms of your question around taxes, there are no additional tax rises needed beyond the ones that I’ve set out. We would extend windfall tax on the profits that energy companies are making and use that to endow a national wealth fund to invest in the low-carbon energy industries of the future …

We would put the VAT and business rates on private schools to fund that investment of 6,500 teachers.

We’d crack down on tax avoidance and ensure that non-doms pay their fair share of tax by including trusts in a way that the Conservatives haven’t in their plans for non-dom taxation. And we’d use that money to fund breakfast clubs in primary schools, as well as our commitments around 40,000 additional appointments in the NHS and the emergency dental appointments as well.

And also we’re committed to ensuring that taxes on private equity bonuses are taxed appropriately.

Those are the some of the tax changes that we will be bringing in because that is what is needed to fund the pledges that we have made.

This is very similar to what Keir Starmer said yesterday. But Jim Pickard from the Financial Times says this goes beyond what Reeves herself said on taxation in her interview with the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday.

at the weekend Rachel Reeves ruled out increases to income tax or National Insurance under a Labour government:

today she has gone much further by saying:

“there are no additional tax rises needed beyond the ones that I’ve said”

Clive Myrie and Laura Kuenssberg have been named as the joint hosts of the BBC’s election night TV coverage, taking over from Huw Edwards.

It is unclear which of the pair will have the task of unveiling the 10pm exit poll and calling the result, a moment which will be replayed for decades.

Having joint anchors will be a break with BBC tradition. The corporation’s general election coverage was helmed by David Dimbleby for every election between 1979 and 2017, before Edwards took over for 2019.

There has been intense lobbying behind the scenes over the job ever since Edwards took leave from the BBC last summer. He finally quit the corporation last month, following stories in the Sun about his texts to a young man, leaving the way for the BBC to formally appoint a replacement.

They will be joined in the BBC’s London studio by BBC political editor Chris Mason and Reeta Chakrabarti. Jeremy Vine will be hosting the BBC’s swingometer from a studio in Cardiff, while Kirsty Wark in Glasgow, and Andrea Catherwood in Belfast will provide coverage from devolved nations.

The BBC also confirmed that it is planning a series of one-on-one leaders’ interviews with Today programme host Nick Robinson. It has also invited the leaders of the seven biggest political parties to a series of debates - although Keir Starmer has already indicated he will only take part in a head-to-head with Rishi Sunak.

The SNP leader John Swinney has written to Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer calling on them to “immediately” recognise the state of Palestine.

He said the SNP would force a binding vote at Westminster after the general election if they failed to do so.

In his letter, Scotland’s first minister wrote:

I urge you both to belatedly do the right thing and pledge to immediately recognise Palestine as a state in its own right.

If you will not immediately commit to doing so, I can confirm that SNP MPs will bring forward a binding vote in the House of Commons at the first possible opportunity after the general election.

Swinney also said the SNP had been a “moral compass” on Gaza at Westminster.

While it’s worth remembering that Swinney called for an immediate ceasefire in his first ministerial acceptance speech earlier this month, all things must now be viewed through the prism of the general election. His predecessor Humza Yousaf’s stance on Gaza – as well as his own in-laws’ plight trapped under Israeli bombardment - was one that garnered him respect and sympathy from voters.

In February, the SNP hoped to force another Labour rebellion when it tabled a Common motion calling for a ceasefire. This was stymied by speaker Lindsey Hoyle, resulting in an almighty row and walk-out by the nationalists and Tories. Given that Gaza continues to cause problems for Labour on the doorstep, it’s interesting to see Swinney making this move early in the campaign.

Yesterday Steve Baker, the Northern Ireland minister and MP for Wycombe, criticised the Tory plan for national service. Today it emerged that he has gone on holiday to Greece. Speaking to the Mirror, which broke the story, Baker said:

The prime minister told everyone we could go on holiday and then called a snap election. So I’ve chosen to do my campaign work in Greece …

My experience has been that when I talk to people who are quite keen to vote for me, they say: ‘Good on you’. I’ve been campaigning for months and my wife deserves to have her husband go away for a much needed break. It’s the only holiday we’ve got planned for the summer.

Peter Kellner, the pollster and elections expert, says Baker was right not to cancel his holiday because he has no chance of winning anyway.

@SteveBakerFRSA is quite right to go on holiday. He is defending his majority in Wycombe of 1,494. No chance of holding the seat. He would do well to keep the majority of @EmmaforWycombe Emma Reynolds below 10,000. Why not stay in Greece and give his concession speech via Zoom?

Douglas Ross, the Scottish Conservative leader, has launched his party’s general election campaign with a speech where he barely mentioned Westminster or Tory policies, and never once said Rishi Sunak’s name.

In another mark of how the Tories are focusing heavily on local campaigns and not their record, Ross devoted his speech to attacking the Scottish National party government in Edinburgh and the SNP’s sleaze row over Michael Matheson’s iPad expenses claim.

He failed to mention Sunak’s new pledge not to tax pensions, or the cuts to national insurance rates, or the tens of millions spent by the UK in Scottish regions, until those policies were raised by newspaper reporters.

Ross was speaking in the Tory target seat of Perth and Kinross-shire, a newly-created constituency, and said this election was solely about defeating the SNP and attacking its “stale and rotten” government in Edinburgh.

The full colour four page campaign leaflet for local Tory candidate Luke Graham, formerly an MP for a nearby pre-boundary change seat, did not name Sunak and had minimal Scottish Tory branding, with just a small party logo at the bottom of an inside page.

Ross said the Scottish Tory goal was to hand the SNP its worst election result in more than a decade. “On July 4, we can wipe the yellow off the map and put blue on the board in Scotland,” he said.

This is factually inaccurate – the SNP will still hold 63 Holyrood seats until the 2026 Scottish parliament election. Yet his speech underscored the peculiar asymmetry of UK politics, where Holyrood politics can dominate an election for a UK parliament.

Tory strategists insist their voters see this election as an opportunity to “kick” the SNP, which can only be a minority party at Westminster. The Tories are defending seven seats. Based on the 2019 general election result, the SNP are their nearest rivals in all seven but Labour’s recent surge in Scotland is stripping votes from both parties.

Pressed by the Guardian on his failure to focus on Westminster policies, Ross denied the Tories were running scared of Sunak’s record.

He said he had been an MP since 2017 and his constituents were mostly angry about NHS waiting lists, education, cuts to council services – all issues controlled by Holyrood.

These are the issues that come up on the doorstep day in, day out. It’s about the priorities people have, here in Perth and Kinross-shire, in Moray … This is an opportunity that voters have cottoned onto that in key seats up and down the country we can beat the SNP by uniting around the Conservatives; we can deliver an election result which will be one of the worst in a decade.

Nigel Farage held a press conference in Dover this morning. He is not leader of Reform UK, or even a candidate in the election, but he is the owner of the party (it’s a company, and he is the majority shareholder), he has a much bigger media profile than the actual leader, Richard Tice, and, characteristically, he did not hold back. Here are some of the main points he made.

• Farage admitted Reform UK has a funding problem. Recently Rowena Mason revealed that since 2021 the party has relied on donations or loans from Tice for about 80% of its money. Asked about the party’s financial plight, Farage said:

Funding is an issue. Funding has been an issue. There’s no question about that. We’re not very well funded at the moment.

But we do have quite a considerable database. I’ll be reaching out to them tomorrow to say come and help us.

Are we going to have the £20m, £30m that Labour and the Conservatives have? No, but we do have a message. And that message is distinct and it’s clear, and it’s different.

• He claimed that Rishi Sunak called a summer election because he does not believe deportation flights to Rwanda will take off in July, as he promised. Farage said:

I am absolutely convinced that the overriding reason for calling a snap early general election is because [Sunak] knows those planes in July, as he promised, would not be going to Rwanda. They weren’t going to go. Rishi can’t stop the boats.

• He said that Labour will win the election easily and so, instead of voting Tory, rightwingers should support a party they believed in instead. He said:

This election is a foregone conclusion. Labour are going to win and they’re going to win quite big. And therefore, you could argue actually, that a vote for the Conservative Party is a wasted vote. And given that, you know, Labour are going to win, why not vote for something that you actually believe in?

• He suggested Reform UK is hoping for a breakthrough at the next election. As PA Media reports, he said he changed the party’s name from Brexit to Reform because the party is not after a “quick hit” but rather is seeking to “build a base” and “launch a serious assault” in the next election of 2028 or 2029.

• He said he was not standing as a candidate in the election because he was a realist. He said:

I’ve only stood once for parliament seriously, and what happened? I stood just a few miles up the road here [in South Thanet], and what happened?

Third party campaign groups spent unbelievable sums of money, putting negativity through people’s doors, the likes of which you can’t believe. The Conservatives cheated, to such an extent that one of the agents got a nine-month prison sentence for mass overspending.

So for me, to fight and win any constituency, I’m going to need a lot of time and a lot of data. I can’t do that in six weeks, so you can call me what you like, but I think realist might be more accurate.

• He defended his decision to say last week that he thought the US election was more important than the UK one. He said:

I believe the world was a much better, safer place with Donald Trump in the White House than it has been with Joe Biden.

So that’s the context, I’m not saying Britain doesn’t matter, far from it. Of course not, I’m British, I’m here. But I do think who wins in America for global safety is absolutely vital.

• He challenged Sunak to debate him. He said:

[Sunak] wants to have six debates with Keir Starmer. Well, all I’m saying is ‘have one with me’.

• Farage dismissed claims that his recent comment about Muslims not sharing British values was Islamophobic. He said:

Look, I will always get attacked because I’ve always been prepared to put the head up and talk about things that other people would rather brush under the carpet and say it’s just too awkward in polite society.

• He claimed he was worried about the growth of sectarian politics in the UK. He said:

You might have noticed that Angela Rayner yesterday was campaigning in her constituency begging, begging a group of Muslim leaders to please vote Labour. You’ll have noticed not a single woman in the room.

So we’re moving into an age in our inner cities and towns I’m worried to say of sectarian politics, with women completely excluded.

Here is the full text of Rachel Reeves’ speech this morning.

And this is what she said about why she thinks the biggest risk to the economy is five more years of Tory government.

No matter how much they tell us that Liz Truss was nothing to do with them, their every action tells us otherwise.

They haven’t learnt their lesson.

They’re singing from the same songbook.

With the Prime Minister’s priorities dissolving into thin air, what is his last, desperate throw of the dice?

Not to deliver on the promises he has made over the last two years.

But instead, to offer up £64 billion worth of unfunded tax cuts.

They offered up another one just last night.

The Conservative cannot say how they’re going to pay for them.

What cuts will they make to public services?

What other taxes will they raise?

Or will they be paid for by yet more borrowing?

And why should anyone believe them, after – I’ll say it again – the tax burden has reached it’s highest in seventy years?

Be in no doubt, the single biggest risk to Britain’s economy is five more years of the Conservative party.

Q: Are you planning a fiscal event or budget before the summer?

Reeves has already ignored two questions on this.

She says the OBR require 10 weeks notice for a budget. And she would not deliver one without an OBR forecast.

That appears to rule out an emergency budget before the summer recess, if Labour wins the election.

(In theory, perhaps, the OBR could already start work costing an emergency Labour budget now, but constitutionally that might be awkward, and if news of that got out, it would look as if Labour were taking the election result for granted, which is the last thing Keir Starmer wants.)

Q: Would you need to raise any other taxes?

Reeves says there are not additional tax rises needed under Labour’s plans beyond those already set out.

Q: Are you a socialist?

Reeves says she describes herself as a social democrat.

What I mean by that is that I believe that children, from whatever background they come from, should get an equal start in life for the opportunities that our country offers.

I believe in strong public services to support people all through their lives from the cradle to the grave.

And I believe that work should always pay and offer security to people.

Q: If you are the pro-business party, who is the pro-labour party?

Reeves says Labour is both.

You can’t be pro working people unless you’re pro the businesses that drive the jobs and the prosperity to ensure that good jobs are available all across our country.

And you can’t be pro business unless you’re pro skilling up and supporting working people to fulfil their potential.

They’re two sides of the same coin.

Q: Does this mean pensioners would pay tax under Labour?

Reeves says she wants taxes to be lower.

But she won’t make unfunded tax cuts, she says.

When Liz Truss made unfunded tax cuts, mortgage rates and interest rates went though the roof, she says.

She says the “crucial difference” between Labour and the Tories is that Labour won’t offer unfunded tax cuts.

Reeves says she worked in the private sector and in financial services before she became an MP. She goes on:

I want to lead the most pro-growth, the most pro- business Treasury that our country has ever seen, with a laser focus on delivering for working people.

Reeves says Rishi Sunak claims that the eonomic problems facing the UK were caused by global economic shocks – Covid, and the energy price spike caused by the war in Ukraine.

But, she says, that is not correct, because the UK has been hit worse than comparable economies because of decisions taken by the Tories.

She says taxes have reached a 70-year high, national debt has more than doubled, and mortgages have gone up as a result of Liz Truss’s mini-budget.

If the UK economy had grown at the rate of the OECD average over the past 14 years, it would be £150bn larger, she says.

Rishi Sunak’s plan is not working, she says. And she says the clearest sign of that is his decision to call an early election.

Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, is giving a speech on the economy in Derby.

She says her proposition is that Labour is “the natural party of British business”.

Mel Stride, the work and pensions secretary, was flying the Tory flag on the morning interview round. Here are some of the main points he made.

• Stride dismissed the significance of the letter from business leaders backing Labour (see 9am), saying it lacked names from big companies. He told LBC:

I was very surprised when I saw that letter and skimmed over the names. And yes, there are some very good and very decent businesses there. There was a complete absence of any company, for example, from the FTSE 100, as far as I could tell.

The letter that we actually put together supporting our biggest tax cut for business in modern history – that’s the full expensing that the chancellor announced – actually had 200 names. That was back in November, and some really very big, very important businesses.

• He dismissed claims that the proposed £2.4bn “triple lock plus” tax cut for pensioners is not properly funded. The Tories say the money will come from savings from cutting down on tax avoidance and evasion. These claims always sound dubious, because the Treasury is supposed to be tackling tax avoidance and evasion anyway. But Stride dismissed objections. He told Times Radio:

We can comfortably raise £6bn from clamping down on tax avoidance and evasion and that figure, in fact, is very much in line with the kind of figures that we’ve achieved in the past and in fact the head of the National Audit Office has actually stated that that number is achievable and that is where the fully funded costing will be met.

• He renewed the Tory call for Keir Starmer to debate Rishi Sunak every week of the campaign. Stride told Times Radio:

The real debate we need and the one that’s being ducked is the challenge that the prime minister has quite rightly put to Keir Starmer to say, ‘Look, every week, let’s stand up in front of the British people and set out our stall and say what we stand for.’

This was very much an exercise in flogging a dead horse. Labour has made it clear that Starmer will debate Sunak, but probably only twice, and there seems to be no chance of weekly debates happening.

Labour has opened applications for a string of new safe seats after half a dozen MPs announced last-minute retirements, with key allies of Keir Starmer expected to be lined up to take their place.

Those standing down include the former shadow minister Barbara Keeley, the chair of the parliamentary Labour party Jon Cryer, as well as John Spellar, Virendra Sharma and Kevin Brennan.

Julie Elliott, the MP for Sunderland Central, joined the ranks of those retiring on this morning. Senior Labour sources said they anticipate there could be several more departures announced in the next 24 hours.

The party is also advertising a number of other safe seats in London, including Stratford and Bow and West Ham and Beckton.

A number of senior Labour figures are widely expected to seek a seat in the coming days, including Josh Simons, the director of the highly influential pro-Starmer thinktank Labour First, and Georgia Gould, leader of Camden council.

Members of the party’s ruling national executive committee who have been instrumental in transforming its rules in the aftermath of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership are also tipped for seats. Those include Luke Akehurst, Gurinder Singh Josan, Abdi Duale and the party’s national executive commitee’s chair James Asser.

The move will trigger controversy from critics who argue that Labour candidates – particularly those in plum seats – should be selected with local input from grassroots members, and not simply handed to allies of the leadership.

In February 2020, while he was campaigning for the Labour leadership, Starmer said that “the selections for Labour candidates needs to be more democratic and we should end NEC impositions of candidates. Local party members should select their candidates for every election.”

Starmer added then that “there should be no power without accountability, and true accountability requires transparency”.

Labour figures argue that special circumstances are triggered once an election is called and candidates must be quickly put in place.

To coincide with the Rachel Reeves speech, 120 business leaders have signed a letter published in the Times backing Labour. The paper has splashed on the news.

In his story, Steven Swinford says:

The signatories, who include senior figures from the City, entrepreneurs, investors, high-profile figures from the world of technology and leading retailers, say change is needed “to achieve the UK’s full economic potential”.

The letter is signed by past and present executives from JP Morgan, Heathrow, Aston Martin, JD Sports, Iceland and the advertising giant WPP. Sir Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, and Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, have also signed the letter, along with the founder of a childcare company in which the prime minister’s wife previously held shares.

It represents the culmination of years intense lobbying by Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, and Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, as they seek to position Labour as the party of business before the general election.

In their letter, the business leaders indicate that they are backing Labour not because of any specific policy pledge, but because Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves are offering stablity. They say for too long the economy has been “beset by instability, stagnation and a lack of long-term focus”. They say they are backing Labour because it will “partner fiscal discipline with a long-term growth strategy, working in partnership with the private sector”.

Here is the text of the letter in full.

We, as leaders and investors in British business, believe it is time for a change. For too long, our economy has been beset by instability, stagnation and a lack of long-term focus.

The UK has the potential to be one of the strongest economies in the world. A lack of political stability and the absence of consistent economic strategy have held it back. The country has been denied the skills and infrastructure it needs to flourish.

We are looking for a government that will partner fiscal discipline with a long-term growth strategy, working in partnership with the private sector to drive innovation and investment to build digital and physical capital and fix our skills system. This is the only way to put us on track for sustained productivity growth.

Labour has shown it has changed and wants to work with business to achieve the UK’s full economic potential. We should now give it the chance to change the country and lead Britain into the future. We are in urgent need of a new outlook to break free from the stagnation of the past decade and we hope by taking this public stand we might persuade others of that need too.

Rachel Reeves will this morning give a speech pledging to lead the most “pro-growth” Treasury in UK history if Labour wins the general election, Anna Isaac reports.

Good morning. Earlier this month Rishi Sunak had a difficult encounter with Janet Street-Porter on Loose Women when she claimed the Tories hated pensioners. Her argument was based on the fact that pensioners would not benefit from the national insurance cut in the budget (because pensioners don’t pay national insurance), and it totally ignored the fact that overall pensioners have gained considerably since the Tories have been in power because of the triple lock, but viewers may have concluded that pensioners had a legitimate grievance against the Conservatives.

Today, in their second big policy announcement of the election campaign, the Tories have announced plans for a £2.4bn tax cut for pensioners intended to win back the Street-Porter vote. Pensioners will get a personal tax allowance that will always rise in line with the triple lock, so that the allowance will always be higher than the state pension. This is how the Conservative party explains it in their news release.

Having cut tax for working people by reducing national insurance from 12% to 8%, the Conservatives will now cut tax for pensioners. Today, the Conservatives announced that from April they will increase the personal allowance for pensioners in line with the triple lock by introducing a new age-related allowance.

That means that for pensioners, both the state pension and their tax-free allowance will always rise in line with the highest of earnings, wages or 2.5%: the new triple lock plus.

This is a tax cut of around £100 for 8 million pensioners next year, which will only grow over time – expected to be almost £300 a year by the end of the parliament. It comes alongside the Conservatives’ existing commitment to the triple lock, which on current forecasts will see the state pension rise by £430 next April – and by around £1,700 a year by the end of the parliament.

The landmark announcement will guarantee in legislation that the pensioners’ personal allowance will always be higher than the level of the new state pension.

The policy will cost £2.4bn a year by 29/30 and be funded through the Conservatives’ previously announced plan to raise an extra £6bn a year by the end of the next parliament by clamping down on tax avoidance and evasion.

In a comment on the plan, Sunak says:

This bold action demonstrates we are on the side of pensioners. The alternative is Labour dragging everyone in receipt of the full state pension into income tax for the first time in history.

The Daily Telegraph and the Daily Express have splashed on the story approvingly.

But Labour has described the plan as a “desperate move” and revived its claim that the Tory proposal to get rid of national insurance over the long term would mean pensions would have to be cut. The Tories claim this is a false smear.

Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, said:

Why would anyone believe the Tories and Rishi Sunak on tax after they left the country with the highest tax burden in 70 years?

This is just another desperate move from a chaotic Tory party torching any remaining facade of its claims to economic credibility.

Not only have they promised to spend tens of billions of pounds since this campaign began, they also have a completely unfunded £46bn policy to scrap national insurance that threatens the very basis of the state pension.

Commenting on the plan on X, Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank, said that the Tories were, in practice, reinstating a special tax allowance for pensioners that they themselves scrapped, under George Osborne, and that half the saving pensioners would get was just the result of their not having to pay a tax increase already in the pipeline.

About half the cost of this is just not imposing the planned tax increase (via 3 more years of freezing allowances) on pensioners. So the £100 “saving” next year is mostly just avoiding a £100 tax increase, rather than an actual giveaway.

NB it was George Osborne who got rid of the higher tax allowance for pensioners. Now want to bring it back. But at a lower level than it was in 2010. Like corporation tax, pension lifetime allowance, personal allowance, another example of total lack of consistency in tax policy

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, gives a speech in the East Midlands, followed by a Q&A with journalists.

10am: Nigel Farage, the Reform UK honorary president, is campaigning in Dover.

10.10am: Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, does a campaign visit with Tim Farron at Windermere.

10.30am: Douglas Ross, the Scottish Tory leader, launches the Scottish Tory election campaign in Perth.

10.30am: Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, is on a visit in East Renfrewshire.

11am: Rishi Sunak is taking part in a Q&A with workers in Staffordshire.

Afternoon: Keir Starmer takes part in a Q&A with workers

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line (BTL) or message me on X (Twitter). I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use X; I’ll see something addressed to @AndrewSparrow very quickly. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos (no error is too small to correct). And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.