Tag: Rachel

  • Does Rachel Reeves believe in capitalism?

    Does Rachel Reeves believe in capitalism?

    |Updated:

    Rachel Reeves ploughed ahead with her party’s changes to the non-dom regime at last year’s Autumn Budget

    The Chancellor can’t do the biggest things she needs for growth because she can’t escape her own ideology, says Helen Thomas

    Spin only gets you so far in the business world. Action has to back up rhetoric or the game will be found out. This is the main difference between business and politics: the former is about what works whereas the latter is about what sells. The most powerful leaders in each world adopt a little bit of both, whether it’s Trump’s tax cuts to Make America Great Again or Jamie Dimon’s ruthlessly successful acquisitions. The UK Chancellor is trying to move from the tearful reality of her fiscal constraints to the smile that welcomes capital into Britain. Unfortunately, tweaking regulations to meet a shopping list of demands from the City’s big lobbyists does not a successful salesperson make.

    The ”Leeds Reforms” and her Mansion House speech provide a good spin but business is judging her on her actions, not words. The smoked salmon and scrambled eggs offensive in the run up to the General Election turned into thin gruel. At her very first Budget she delivered a wholly unanticipated rise in employer’s national insurance contributions – something which she herself in opposition had rightly recognised as a tax on jobs. Rather than be as intensely relaxed about the rich as Peter Mandelson had been after the last big election win for Labour, she delivered policies squarely aimed at those accumulating wealth. She changed inheritance tax rules, penalised family firms for handing the company down through the generations and raised taxes on carried interest and capital gains. No amount of spin can change the impression that has already been made by actions that have already been taken.

    Reeves believes capitalism betrays voters

    The truth for business is that Rachel Reeves cannot escape her own ideology. She revealed it in her 2024 Mais Lecture, that “a model based on the pursuit of narrow-based, narrowly-shared growth – with ever-diminishing returns – cannot produce adequate returns in growth and living standards, and nor can it command democratic consent”. In short, capitalism not only doesn’t work, it betrays voters. Government must step in. She argued then that “Securonomics advances not the big state but the smart and strategic state”. In her FT opinion piece she refers to how the Leeds Reforms are an example of this ideology; they “deliver on my commitment to regulate for growth”.

    Play Video

    But growth cannot be regulated for. Wealth creation cannot be mandated by government. The point of capitalism is for private capital to find its way to productive projects. Government can remove barriers to entry and police the rules but it can’t rewrite the rules of investment. This is where her attempt to solve an undoubted problem, that the UK equity markets struggle to scale capital, runs into an ideological roadblock. She can’t tell British retail savers to buy UK firms, nor force money into British stocks by tweaking listing regimes. She has to create an environment in which those firms can thrive and then they can compete more effectively for capital. The invisible hand becomes the clunking fist through too much government intervention.

    Wealth creation cannot be mandated by government. The point of capitalism is for private capital to find its way to productive projects

    It can also lead to unintended consequences. Whilst her changes to loan-to-value rules deliver on a manifesto promise to create a “Freedom to Buy” scheme for homes for first-time buyers, it once again destabilises the natural supply and demand of the housing market by increasing leverage so that buyers can meet higher prices. But of course no politician has yet been brave enough to let house prices fall to such a degree that a new generation of buyers can get their foot on the ladder. If a Labour government with such a huge majority can’t do something unpopular with the home-owning class, then the housing market will likely never find its true clearing price.

    It wasn’t just housing that made its way into the Leeds Reforms. Listing regimes, the Senior Managers Regime, digitisation and ringfencing have all been tweaked, or promised a consultation for tweaks. Whilst some are welcome, it is hard to hang them together into a consistent narrative that makes sense to investors and wealth creators. This was a sales story with something for everyone in the City; and yet, in aggregating the list, the sum total appears to be less than its parts. What is the overarching story of this government’s approach to financial services? One year into its term and there is no clear plan for the future nor actual evidence that the list of tweaks will deliver the growth the country so desperately needs. Just a government that wants to do a great number of small things rather than a small number of great things.

    Helen Thomas is founder and CEO of Blonde Money

  • Rachel needed a hug. Instead Starmer did the opposite

    Rachel needed a hug. Instead Starmer did the opposite

    There are moments in life where you just have to set aside politics and remember that, at the end of the day, we are all human.

    I thought that years ago, when Margaret Thatcher’s eyes welled up as she left No 10 for good. It wasn’t the first time we had seen her cry – back in 1982 she had lost her composure after her son, Mark, went missing in the desert.

    This time, though, people seemed to delight in the sight of her reduced to tears; but the truth is that in that moment she was not the Iron Lady at all, just an ordinary woman. You would have needed a heart of stone not to feel sorry for her.

    It was the same yesterday in Parliament as a big fat tear rolled down the Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s anguished face during Prime Minister’s Questions.

    Her bottom lip trembling uncontrollably, she struggled visibly to contain her emotions. Her body language was meek and defensive, her legs tightly crossed, her shoulders hunched as though braced for a blow. It was, quite honestly, heartbreaking to watch.

    In that moment she wasn’t ‘Rachel from accounts’, or the woman whose CV has more embellishments than Elton John’s glasses, or the person responsible for some of the most disastrous policies since Liz Truss played fantasy fiscal football with the economy; she was just a very sad lady who obviously needed a hug, a cup of sugary tea – and very possibly a nice lie-down in a darkened room.

    In that moment she wasn’t ‘Rachel from accounts’, says Sarah Vine. She was just a very sad lady who obviously needed a hug, a cup of sugary tea – and very possibly a nice lie-down in a darkened room

    It wasn’t an especially gladiatorial session, although Badenoch was somewhat on the front foot, skewering the Prime Minister – as is her job – over his disastrous Welfare Reform Bill.

    There was, as there often is, a bit of laughing and pointing, at which point Badenoch challenged Keir Starmer to clarify Reeves’s position.

    ‘She looks absolutely miserable,’ said Badenoch, adding: ‘Labour MPs are going on the record saying she is toast. The reality is that she is a human shield for his incompetence. In January he said she will be in post until the next election. Will she really?’

    All he had to do was stand up and say: ‘Don’t be ridiculous, of course she’s not toast,’ or words to that effect. Instead, he started droning on about northern infrastructure and children’s breakfast clubs, while poor Reeves stared beseechingly up at him, no doubt waiting for him to back her up. As he pressed his points with characteristic turgidity, the realisation visibly dawned on her face that he was not, in fact, going to do so. Her expression crumpled; her composure buckled.

    By the time he sat down, apparently triumphant, she looked like all the air had been sucked out of her. Badenoch’s response was brief yet devastating: ‘How awful for the Chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.’ How awful indeed.

    His response might have been his chance to remedy this oversight. But once again, he set off on the same track, droning on about Labour’s ‘achievements’.

    This is politics, the most brutal sport on the planet, Sarah Vine writes, a world where to be human is not only to err, but also to make yourself a target for even more scorn and derision

    Her body language was meek and defensive, her legs tightly crossed, her shoulders hunched as though braced for a blow, says Sarah Vine. It was, quite honestly, heartbreaking to watch

    Gamely, Reeves nodded along but the distraught expression on her face said it all. She wiped away a tear. Two stops to her right, an inscrutable smile caressed Angela Rayner’s lips.

    Why the person sitting next to her didn’t just put her arm around her I honestly don’t know. Not Rayner, obviously, who was giving off serious Cruella vibes in her power puff sleeves. But whoever was on her left – the education secretary Bridget Phillipson, I think – might have offered her even just a gentle hand on the shoulder. Instead, nothing.

    But then what do you expect? This is politics, the most brutal sport on the planet, a world where to be human is not only to err, but also to make yourself a target for even more scorn and derision, where even the slightest glimmer of weakness is interpreted as an opportunity to wound and where, when the chips are down (and they always are), it’s every man, woman and special adviser for themselves.

    What we saw played out in Parliament yesterday – that absolute lack of common decency or community or even just basic concern for a colleague – is the kind of thing I remember so clearly from all my years spent in close proximity to this environment via my ex-husband Michael Gove’s parliamentary career.

    The way the entire house just sat back and watched this poor woman fall to pieces before their very eyes; the way they all just kept going, as though she were nothing more than political roadkill. Monstrous. Inhuman.

    But that is the nature of the game. It’s what goes on behind closed doors and in the corridors of Westminster every hour of every day. It is the reason good people, nice people, kind, sensitive people don’t survive or thrive in politics, and it’s the reason the ones who do are such unutterable bullies and, frankly, weirdos.

    ‘If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen’: isn’t that what everyone always says? But that depends what kind of kitchen you want. One where everyone’s got third degree burns?

    To survive in politics you have to grow a skin so thick nothing, not even an armoured tank, can penetrate it.

    You have to understand that it doesn’t matter how low you are feeling, or how many personal issues you are dealing with (that is the official explanation for Reeves’s distress). Or whether you’ve just had a stand- up row with your partner or fallen out with a colleague (again, this also has been posited as a reason, the suggestion being that Reeves had a bit of an altercation with the Speaker, Lindsay Hoyle – but by all accounts he is not an especially combative fellow and certainly nothing like as unpleasant as his predecessor John Bercow). No one cares. No one.

    In particular, if you are a frontline politician tasked with a particularly difficult set of policies, you are seriously deluded if you believe for one second that the political capital you expend will be shared equally among your colleagues.

    In the case of Reeves, she is – as Badenoch says – paying for the Prime Minister’s mistakes. But instead of putting his arm around her and absorbing some of the blows, he is doing the opposite. He’s a political vampire, sucking her dry to shore up his position.

    Of course, it doesn’t help that she’s a woman. It’s not just that Labour is an old-fashioned boys’ club which has never even contemplated a woman leader (indeed Starmer himself – who once said ‘99.9 per cent of women don’t have a penis’ – doesn’t even know for certain what a woman actually is).

    It’s also that women are just more open emotionally than men generally. We can’t help it – it’s part of what makes us mothers and nurturers.

    Men may feel emotions just as deeply – but women are more able to express them.

    And yesterday Rachel Reeves showed the world exactly how she feels about being Starmer’s whipping boy.

    Listen to Peter Hitchens and Sarah Vine debate the biggest talking points of the week on Alas Vine & Hitchens. Available wherever you get your podcasts now.

  • Operation Save Rachel: Keir scrambles to shore up weeping Reeves and guarantees her job after her tears triggered market drop

    Operation Save Rachel: Keir scrambles to shore up weeping Reeves and guarantees her job after her tears triggered market drop

    Rachel Reeves put on a smile for cameras today as she appeared at an NHS plan launch less than 24 hours after her dramatic tears at PMQs.

    The Chancellor was flanked at the event in London by Keir Starmer – who gave her an awkward hug – and Health Secretary Wes Streeting – who heaped praise on her.

    She said it was ‘great to be here today’, but did not refer to the scenes from yesterday. And onlookers seemed to be regarding her upbeat demeanour with some scepticism.

    The PM has given a guarantee that Ms Reeves will remain in her job‘into the next election and for many years after’ amid continuing mystery over her public show of emotion.

    Markets slowly recovered ground this morning after being spooked by the the Commons meltdown and speculation Ms Reeves might be on the way out.

    Interest rates on gilts – the way the government borrows money – have subsided and the Pound has stabilised. Ms Reeves is said to have told MPs before the episode that she was ‘under pressure’ with an apparent £30-£40billion pound black hole in the public finances.

    After Downing Street denied claims of a bust up at the top ranks of government, Sir Keir insisted that the cause of Ms Reeves’ misery was ‘purely personal’, saying that politicians are ‘humans’.

    Extraordinarily, he also suggested he did not notice his Chancellor was crying next to him because he was busy answering questions – even though Kemi Badenoch was telling him that Ms Reeves looked ‘miserable’.

    ‘If it had been anybody else at work it would not really have been noticed,’ he told Virgin Radio.

    Sir Keir suggested he had ‘personally didn’t appreciate it was happening in the chamber’ because he was answering questions.

    He also appeared to double down on Ms Reeves’ stance on her ‘cast iron’ fiscal rules – despite the increasingly parlous state of the public finances.

    ‘She and I are absolutely committed to our fiscal rules,’ he said.

    Chancellor Rachel Reeves was flanked at the NHS event in London by Keir Starmer – who gave her an awkward hug. But onlookers seemed to be regarding her upbeat demeanour with some scepticism

    Health Secretary Wes Streeting heaped praise on Ms Reeves

    Chancellor Rachel Reeves was flanked at the event in London by Keir Starmer and Health Secretary Wes Streeting – who heaped praise on her

    Tears roll down Rachel Reeves’ face in the Commons yesterday, sparking a political and economic crisis

    Rachel Reeves was weeping during PMQs as Keir Starmer was battered over his welfare humbling and refused to back her. She looked at him throughout the tears

    In an extraordinary moment, a tear appeared to roll down Ms Reeves’ cheek as Kemi Badenoch demanded a guarantee she would stay in No11 – something the premier did not give

    Sir Keir has now backed Ms Reeves to be Chancellor ‘into the next election and for many years after’

    Sir Keir said the Chancellor’s tears were ‘nothing to do with politics, nothing to do with the ups and downs of this week, or her relationship with anybody in the Labour Party, it’s purely personal’.

    He said: ‘What I would say is – and you’ll understand this – in politics, you’re on show the whole time, there’s no hiding place.

    ‘But we are humans in the end and sometimes personal things are obviously on our minds and, in this case, that was the situation.’

    He said they were ‘absolutely committed to our fiscal rules and the economic stability that is so important for this country, and that is the rock on which we build everything else’.

    ‘On that issue, Rachel and I are in lockstep, and have been for years.’

    He added: ‘She’s great colleague. She’s a friend of mine and I’ll be working with her for a very long time to come.

    ‘But like all human beings, we’re also personal. There are moments that catch us off guard and if you’re in front of a camera for large periods of your life, unfortunately, that could be caught on camera in a way, if it had been anybody else at work, it would have not really been noticed.’

    The Chancellor is said to clashed with Speaker Lindsay Hoyle just before PMQs after he rebuked her for giving over-long answers at Treasury questions on Tuesday.

    To Sir Lindsay’s surprise, she burst into tears and was heard to remark she was ‘under so much pressure’.

    Ms Reeves appeared to become particularly emotional as Sir Keir refused to guarantee she will be in her job until the next election.

    Afterwards she was seen being comforted by her sister Ellie – also a Labour minister – as she left the chamber, although Sir Keir did not speak to her.

    Ms Reeves’ spokesman insisted afterwards that it was a ‘personal matter’ and he would not be ‘getting into’ the reasons.

    No10 and No11 both denied claims Ms Reeves had an argument with Sir Keir before they entered the Commons.

    One Cabinet minister told the Mail’s Dan Hodges: ‘She was already on edge after an argument she had with Angela Rayner over the benefits climbdown. Then when Lindsay had a little pop that pushed her over the edge. But it wasn’t his fault. It wasn’t really about him.’

    But allies of Ms Rayner dismissed the suggestion of a row as ‘b***ocks’, insisting the Deputy Prime Minister had not spoken to Ms Reeves before PMQs.

    In a separate interview with the BBC last night, Sir Keir denied any rift between them and said her tears had ‘nothing to do with politics’ or Labour’s embarrassing U-turns on benefits.

    ‘That’s absolutely wrong,’ he said. ‘[it’s] nothing to do with what’s happened this week. It was a personal matter for her, I’m not going to intrude on her privacy by talking to you.’

    He added: ‘She’s done an excellent job as chancellor and we have delivered inward investment to this country in record numbers. She and I work together, we think together’, he said.

    ‘In the past there have been examples – I won’t give any specifics – of chancellors and prime ministers who weren’t in lockstep. We’re in lockstep.’

    Health Secretary Wes Streeting said Ms Reeves was a ‘tough cookie’.

    ‘It’s why with the choices she’s made, not always the most popular choices, is creating the conditions for our economy to grow,’ he told ITV’s Peston.

    Mr Streeting added Ms Reeves has ‘something going on personally, not professionally’.

    ‘It’s easy to forget that we’re all humans as politicians and we have lives like everyone else,’ he continued.

    Interest rates on 10-year and 30-year gilts – effectively the cost of government borrowing – spiked and the pound slipped sharply against the US dollar as the Commons scenes unfolded earlier.

    Just a year on from his election landslide, Sir Keir’s authority has been left in tatters after his extraordinary surrender to avert defeat at the hands of Labour rebels.

    Ms Badenoch said he had made ‘mistake after mistake’, highlighting volte faces over grooming gangs and winter fuel allowance. She also pointed to a visibly-upset Reeves, sitting next to the PM, saying she looked ‘miserable’ and was being used as a ‘human shield’.

    Last night Sir Keir effectively tore up his benefits reforms, which had been due to shave £5billion a year off spirallling costs by the end of the Parliament – but will now actually increase spending by £100million.

    The move heaped misery on Ms Reeves, who was already struggling to fill a black hole in the public finances that could amount to tens of billions of pounds.

    Touring broadcast studios this morning, Cabinet Office minister Pat McFadden warned there would be ‘financial consequences’ – hinting that the tax burden will need to rise again.

    Ms Reeves has insisted Labour will stick to manifesto pledges of no hikes to income tax, employee National Insurance or VAT. And she had been adamant that she will not break her ‘cast iron’ fiscal rules.

    But she refused to guarantee yesterday that the hated freeze in tax thresholds will not be extended.

    Health Secretary Wes Streeting said Ms Reeves has ‘toughness and hard-headedness… in spades’ as he spoke out in support of the Chancellor

    Angela Rayner seemed oblivious as Ms Reeves wiped her eyes a few feet away along the green benches

    Deputy PM Angela Rayner is said to have brokered the deal with rebels, fueling speculation that she is positioning to succeed Sir Keir

    In highly emotional scenes at PMQs, Ms Badenoch said: ‘This man has forgotten that his welfare bill was there to plug a black hole created by the Chancellor. Instead they’re creating new ones. They’re creating new ones.

    ‘(Ms Reeves) is pointing at me, she looks absolutely miserable. Labour MPs are going on the record saying that the Chancellor is toast, and the reality is that she is a human shield for his incompetence. In January, he said that she would be in post until the next election. Will she really?’

    Sir Keir replied: ‘(Mrs Badenoch) certainly won’t. I have to say, I’m always cheered up when she asks me questions or responds to a statement because she always makes a complete mess of it and shows just how unserious and irrelevant they are.

    ‘She talks about the black hole, they left a £22billion black hole in our economy and we’re clearing it up, and I’m really proud that in the first year of a Labour Government, we got free school meals, breakfast clubs, childcare, got £15 billion invested in transport in the North and the Midlands.

    ‘We’re cutting regulation, planning and infrastructure is pounding forward, building 1.5 million homes, the biggest investment in social and affordable housing, and of course the three trade deals.’

    Mrs Badenoch replied: ‘How awful for the Chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.’

    Challenged afterwards why Sir Keir failed to give Ms Reeves the vote of confidence, the PM’s press secretary said: ‘He has done so repeatedly.

    ‘The Chancellor is going nowhere. She has the Prime Minister’s full backing.

    ‘He has said it plenty of times, he doesn’t need to repeat it every time the Leader of the Opposition speculates about Labour politicians.

    ‘The Chancellor and the Prime Minister are focused entirely on delivering for working people.

    ‘It’s thanks to the Chancellor’s management of the economy that we managed to restore stability, which has led to four interest rate cuts, wages rising faster than inflation and she recently delivered a spending review that invested in Britain’s national renewal.’

    Asked whether the Prime Minister still had confidence in Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, the press secretary said: ‘Yes.’

    A spokesman for the Chancellor said: ‘It’s a personal matter which, as you would expect, we are not going to get into.

    ‘The Chancellor will be working out of Downing Street this afternoon.’

    Aides to Speaker Lindsay Hoyle refused to comment on claims he had a row with Ms Reeves shortly before the PMQs session began.

    But MPs believe Sir Lindsay only rebuked Ms Reeves for giving excessively long answers at Treasury questions yesterday, with the Speaker surprised that she immediate became upset.

    The pair had already exchanged words on the subject during the session yesterday.

    One MP told MailOnline that the cause was a spat with the PM before that clash. ‘There has been a major row before, just before she walked in. I think it was with Keir,’ they said.

    However, both No10 and No11 denied that there was any argument between Ms Reeves and Sir Keir.

    After the session, Mrs Badenoch’s spokesman said ‘personal matter doesn’t really clear it up’ and ‘you normally tell people what the personal matter is’.

    He added: ‘I’m not going to speculate… I think we should find out what’s going on.’

    Labour circles have been in a frenzy over how the Chancellor will handle the crisis in the public finances. One MP said: ‘She is in massive trouble. This government has lost control. It is the worst politics of anybody – it doesn’t matter whether you are left or right.

    ‘Governments get this after four years, but we’re not even at one year.’

    Rather than leaving the Commons immediate after PMQs as usual, Sir Keir remained on the estate for about two hours having meetings.

    Meanwhile, rebel ringleaders gloated that they had ‘power’ over the PM and stepped up demands for a lurch to the Left.

    Rachael Maskell, whose fatal amendment sparked the benefits shambles, urged a £24billion ‘wealth tax’ to pay for more handouts.

    Deputy PM Angela Rayner is said to have brokered the deal with rebels, fueling speculation that she is positioning to succeed Sir Keir. Opponents jibed it is obvious that Sir Keir will not now lead the party into the next election.

    Appearing on ITV’s Lorraine show, Ms Rayner insisted she did not want the top job, joking that it would ‘age me by 10 years’.

    Told that Sir Keir looked ‘tired’ and ‘exhausted’, she said: ‘It’s a very challenging job. To be fair for Keir Starmer there’s been a lot going on…

    ‘There’s a lot going on and the PM’s been here there and everywhere doing the job for Britain.’

    Amid carnage at Westminster yesterday, the PM’s carefully assembled truce with rebels dramatically disintegrated.

    Facing the threat of a massive revolt, Sir Keir opted to make yet another major concession just 90 minutes before the vote.

    Ministers pledged that changes to disability handouts will not be finalised until after a review – meaning that the package as it stands will actually make the current system more expensive than before up to 2029.

    Sir Keir – who is days away from marking the first anniversary of his election landslide – had already agreed that the benefits curbs would only apply to new claimants.

    There was mocking laughter in the chamber as Social Security Minister Stephen Timms was asked how much the proposals would save now, and merely replied that the government would ‘set out figures in the usual way’.

    Despite the humiliating manoeuvres, when the vote was held 44 Labour MPs still backed the fatal amendment and others abstained – although it was comfortably defeated by 328 to 149 as Tories largely stayed away.

    Shortly afterwards, the Bill cleared second reading stage by 335 to 260, with the rebellion growing to 49. It will now be scrutinised at committee, where there could be further problems.

    Keir Starmer put on a big smile for the cameras as he left for PMQs this morning, despite his authority being left in tatters after his extraordinary surrender to avert defeat at the hands of Labour rebels

    But Sir Keir suffered an unfortunate moment as he tripped over the step

    Keir Starmer insisted the smoking ruing of his benefits reforms would still make things better during brutal PMQs clashes with Kemi Badenoch

    Rachael Maskell, whose fatal amendment sparked the benefits shambles, urged a £24billion ‘wealth tax’ to pay for more handouts

    The concessions twist the knife on Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who was already struggling to fill a black hole in the public finances that could amount to tens of billions of pounds

    Mr McFadden told BBC Breakfast he is ‘not going to speculate’ on what could be in the Autumn Budget but there would be ‘financial consequences’.

    ‘This is one moving part of the budgetary picture, it does have a financial consequence yesterday,’ he said.

    ‘I’m not going to speculate on where the budget lands, because there are so many other different moving parts in it, and it wouldn’t make sense for me to do that.’

    Asked explicitly whether he could rule out tax rises, Mr McFadden said: ‘I’m not going to speculate on the budget.

    ‘We will keep to the tax promises that we made in our manifesto when we fought the election last year. But it doesn’t make sense for me to speculate on something where, as I say, there are so many moving parts of which this is only one element.’

    Ms Rayner said Ms Reeves would have to ‘look’ at the finances in the Autumn after the benefits overhaul.

    ‘That does have a cost to it… that will have to be set out in the Budget in the normal way. Rachel, our chancellor, will have to look at the challenges we face,’ she said.

    Presenter Lorraine Kelly said to the Deputy PM of Sir Keir: ‘You’re working with him all the time – he looks absolutely exhausted. Some have said he might not be here after xmas, he doesn’t have the stomach for it or anything.’

    Ms Rayner replied: ‘Even before I was in politics, I said that have you ever seen a prime minister after a year or two in government?

    ‘And people always say to me, do you want to be Prime Minister? Not a chance. It’ll age me by 10 years within six months.’

    She added: ‘It is a very challenging job, and there’s been, to be fair for Keir Starmer, there’s been a lot going on.

    ‘He’s been all around the world trying to repair the relationships in Europe. We’ve got the trade deals that the previous government wasn’t able to do, tackling the things like the tariffs that the President in the US wanted to put onto the UK, which would have damaged our economy again.

    ‘There’s a lot going on, and the Prime Minister’s been […] here, there and everywhere, doing the job for Britain.’

    Polling expert Professor Sir John Curtice has referred to Sir Keir’s first year in office as ‘the worst start for any newly elected prime minister’.

    He told Times Radio that the PM was ‘never especially popular’ and that ‘the public still don’t know what he stands for.’

    Pressed if she would be interested in taking over No10 at some point, Ms Rayner told the ITV programme: ‘No’.

    She said that she is ‘passionate’ about issues including workers’ rights and council housing.

    ‘I’m very interested in delivering for the people of this country, because … to be elected as an MP from my background was incredible,’ she said.

    ‘Having that opportunity to serve my community that have raised me, looked after me, given me opportunities, and I don’t forget that. And to be Deputy Prime Minister of this country … it’s got to count for something.’

    Welfare minister Stephen Timms prompted gasps from MPs as he announced the volte face last night

    Despite the humiliating manoeuvres, when the vote was held 44 Labour MPs still backed the fatal amendment and others abstained

    Ms Maskell told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that ‘we need to look at those with the broader shoulders’ to balance the books.

    She said she was also ‘worried about public finances’.

    ‘And that’s why I think we heard very much in the debate, including from myself, that we need to look at those with the broader shoulders, as the Prime Minister said, contributing more into our system, but never pushing down on the poorest,’ she said.

    ‘And that was what the dynamic was yesterday, that we do need to look at things like a wealth tax, £24 billion, or equalisation of capital gains tax.’

    Rachel Reeves’ teary PMQs

    11.59am – Rachel Reeves is seen taking her seat in the Commons ahead of PMQs. Her eyes appear puffy.

    An MP behind her taps her on the shoulder – perhaps asking if she is ok – before receiving a reply from the Chancellor.

    Ms Reeves then cracks a smile as she talks to Sir Keir Starmer on the Labour front bench.

    12.12pm – Ms Reeves responds after Tory leader Kemi Badenoch notes how the Chancellor ‘looks absolutely miserable’.

    12.13pm – A tear rolls down Ms Reeves’ face.

    It came as Sir Keir failed to provide an answer to Mrs Badenoch’s question about whether the Chancellor would remain in post until the next general election.

    12.31pm – Ms Reeves’ bottom lip wobbles and tears roll down both her cheeks as the PM answers a question from Glasgow North MP Martin Rhodes.

    12.37pm – The Chancellor leaves the House of Commons chamber after PMQs finishes.

Our Portfolio

Latest Questions

Categories

TAGS

Contacts

Miscellaneous

Categories

SWITCH CURRENCY