Jeremy Hunt puts focus on trust in major interview as Boris Johnson faces questions – as it happened

Closing summary

And Hunt risks reigniting the row over his views on abortion, refusing to rule out backing moves to cut the legal time limit. He has previously been criticised for arguing in favour of the move at a time when the UK government was facing calls to give women in Northern Ireland the right to an abortion.

He says it’s a matter of public record that he voted for the time limit to be reduced from 24 weeks to 12 in 2008, but says he wouldn’t “seek to change the law” as prime minister. He does not, however, rule out backing someone else’s attempts to do so.

How I vote in any future private member’s bill would be a matter of conscience and I would have to see what that bill is before I make that decision.

Kuenssberg presses Hunt on how he will pay for the significant spending promises he has made. He says he wants to “cut taxes on ordinary people” but still spend vast sums on various social projects.

And the only way that you can afford all of those things is to fire up the British economy. And, as someone who set up their own business, I want to help thousands more young people set up their businesses. Let me just give you this one example, Laura: We’re growing at 1.5% a year at the moment. If we were growing at 3% a year, which is the American growth rate, we’d have an extra £20bn to spend on public services or tax cuts. All conservatives want to do both of those things and that’s why my first focus is to really grow the economy.

Kuenssberg points out that his corporation tax cut would “probably be about £13bn”, that he wants to spend an extra £15bn on defence and more money on caring for the elderly. She asks if the no-deal Brexit he’s willing to pursue would not end up costing the treasury yet more money. “Where are you going to get all that cash from? I mean would you borrow more than Philip Hammond has as Chancellor?”

No, I will follow a fiscal rule that is very clear that debt will continue to fall as a proportion of GDP over the cycle and we’ve costed these commitments very very carefully indeed.

Hunt adds that he wants to cut corporation tax to “Irish levels”, proposing a levy of 12.5%, rather than the current main rate, which is set at 19%.

When they made that move a number of years ago, their GDP per head was lower than ours. Now it’s nearly 50% higher than ours. So, this is the way that we fire up the economy: we create the jobs; we get the money for our precious public services like the NHS; transform our social care system; and find tax cuts. But there is no magic about this. If you don’t create the wealth you can’t spend it.

On social care, Hunt says he wants people to begin saving for it as they currently do for their retirement.

Well I negotiated a 10-year plan for the NHS and my next job if I’d stayed as health secretary was to a 10-year plan for the social care system. And I do think that councils need more money because I think we want to be a country where we know that as people get older they’re going to be properly looked after.

So I think there is a bit of public money. But it’s also about personal responsibility. I think we should be a country where people save for their social care costs, particularly those last few months, possibly years of their life when things can be very uncomfortable, very painful. Just In the same way they save for their pension. I think it should be something that people can opt out of but it should be an automatic thing.

Asked if he would cap social care costs – an issue that caused Theresa May significant damage at the 2017 general election – he says those who had saved would have their costs capped.

I’d do a deal. If you’re prepared to save responsibly during your life, then we will cut those costs. Do the right thing. We need to be a country which rewards people who do the right thing and I think if we do that, if you look at where we were in the post-war period where many people didn’t save for their pensions, we’ve created a society where the majority of people do save for their pensions. That’s the change we need for social care.

He does not elaborate on what would happen to those who had not saved, nor does he give any details about the amount that would need to be saved to benefit from the cut in costs, nor how much of a cut would be made.

Addressing the possibility of a no-deal Brexit, Hunt says that, while it’s not his preferred option, he would take it if he didn’t think a deal was possible by 31 October – even though he acknowledges it’d destroy people’s livelihoods.

I think that ‘31st of October come hell or high water’ is a fake deadline, because it’s more likely to trip us into a general election before we’ve delivered Brexit, and that would hand the keys to Jeremy Corbyn and then we’d have no Brexit at all.

But, in my case, how would I approach this: I think we’ll know very soon well before 31st October if there is a deal to be done along the basis I’ve said. If there isn’t and if no-deal is still on the table, I’ve been very clear: I will leave the European Union without a deal.

But I’m not going to do that if there’s a prospect of a better deal and, if I did it, it would be with a heavy heart because businesses up and down the country would face a lot of destruction. I think it’d be very bad for the union, with Scotland where I was at the weekend … so I would do it though. But as a last resort.

Interestingly, Hunt has given himself a significant amount of wiggle-room on the no-deal Brexit question, acknowledging that it may not be “on the table” when the 31 October deadline comes around.

Any Tory prime minister would be vulnerable to a no-confidence vote and some of the party’s own MPs have already indicated they would vote against it in such an instance if doing so would prevent a no-deal Brexit.

Asked about how he can bring together a negotiating team that includes Tories from across the UK, as well as the DUP, who Kuenssberg points out “fundamentally disagree with each other”, Hunt says:

Well, this is the big difference between the way I want to handle it and the way we handled it before because, yes, I think there is a deal that can unite all wings of the Conservative party and our friends in the DUP. But it’s got to be different to Theresa May’s deal. We can’t put forward a deal to Brussels unless they absolutely know that it could get through the British parliament.

Hunt is asked if his approach – like that of Johnson – is not simply “something that the European Union has said no to on multiple occasions. It’s what Theresa May tried and failed to do many times”.

Well, what Theresa May tried to do was a deal involving the backstop. I was in cabinet at the time and I supported her loyally but I never thought that was the right approach. What I’m talking about is a deal that doesn’t involve the backstop as it’s constituted at the moment, so it would be different.

Hunt is confronted about his claim he can renegotiate a deal the EU has repeatedly said is not open for renegotiation. He insists, as he has done before, that he’s being given a different message in conversations with European leaders.

When I talk to European leaders, what they say is: ‘look, it’s up to the UK to come up with a solution. But, of course, if you come up with a different solution, something that can work, when we’ll look at the whole package’.

Hunt’s claim is led some credence by the admission that Germany is ready to listen to ideas on how to solve the backstop problem. It’s perhaps worth pointing out, however, that what Germany did not say is that it’s willing to back down on the overall object of the backstop: preventing a hard border.

Asked what he would change to that end, Hunt acknowledges his plan is similar to that of his opponent.

It would be changing the backstop with some guarantees that we’re not going to have a hard border on the island of Ireland for completely obvious reasons. That approach is not too different to what Boris wants. I think it’ll be a technology-led solution.

What, exactly, that “technology-led solution” entails remains something of a mystery, however, as Hunt is short on details in the interview on how he actually sees it working. He says:

I think everyone thinks that, within the next decade, we aren’t going to have big border checks when it comes to goods because we’re going to do all these things online, just like the rest of our lives is transformed. And that discussion is what do you do if there’s a disagreement about what technology can do, so you need some mechanisms that resolve those disputes.

While Germany is ready to discuss options, the EU has rejected the idea that solely technological means can effectively replace border checks.

In the interview, however, Hunt says he thinks that very solution “is ready” to be put in place right away and that he believes the bloc has simply been unwilling thus far to discuss it because it wants to keep the UK in the customs union.

But I think they know now that won’t get through Parliament. So what I’m saying is let’s not be negative, let’s not be pessimistic. There is a way we can do this but what we have to do is send the right prime minister to Brussels to have those negotiations, have those open discussions and then I think there is a deal to be done.

In his interview with the BBC’s political editor, Laura Kuenssberg, Hunt returns again and again to the question of character, insisting he can be trusted to negotiate a deal with the EU.

Boris and I want to change that deal and the judgement is: who is the person we trust as PM to go to Brussels and bring back that deal? It’s about the personality of our PM. If you choose someone where there’s no trust, there’s going to be no negotiation, no deal. And, quite possibly, a general election, which could mean we have no Brexit either. If you choose someone that the other side will talk to who’s going to be very tough, there will least be in negotiation and I believe this deal to be done.

The significance of this approach – particularly at a time when his opponent has been facing so many questions about his own temperament and attention to detail – is difficult to overstate. Hunt, however, tries to play it down. Asked if he thinks Johnson would be an untrustworthy prime minister, he says:

I would never make those comments about a fellow candidate. I would serve Boris Johnson to the very best of my ability and make his prime ministership a success and I hope he’d do the same for me.

It’s pointed out that it’s somewhat implausible – in a two-horse race – to suggest he is not casting Johnson as untrustworthy. He responds:

No I’m saying I am trustworthy and I do believe that I can be trusted to deliver this deal.

He’s also asked how he can be trusted by the EU, given that he caused a major row when he compared the bloc to the Soviet Union last year. He says:

I am not afraid to speak uncomfortable truths to our partners in the EU. The point I made in that speech was it was totally inappropriate for an organisation that was set up to defend freedom to make it impossible for a member to leave. I will say tough things when I need to say tough things. But I’ll also preserve the relationship. I think I’ve also shown as foreign secretary that I can have good links with European countries. And that’s why I’m the right person to deliver Brexit.

Jeremy Hunt puts personality at the heart of Downing Street debate

Afternoon summary

From the Mail’s John Stevens

McDonnell says he is pushing for Labour to back remain in second referendum

Lisa O’Carroll

Hunt says Johnson should debate him on TV tonight if he wants answer to his Brexit letter