Borrowing costs jump and pound falls after Reeves' tears
Reeves was at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday following the government's U-turn on plans to cut benefits.
Markets reacted after her emotional state sparked speculation about her position in government.
Sterling fell notably, down 1% against the dollar, although it has recently been trading very strongly.
Borrowing costs also soared, in one of the biggest one-day moves since October 2022 when markets were in turmoil after Truss's mini budget, which eventually led to her downfall.
The rise eased slightly after Prime Minister Keir Starmer's press secretary tried to quell rumours that Reeves might be replaced.
"The chancellor is going nowhere, she has the prime minister's full backing", they said, although Starmer himself declined to give her a public show of support.
But the rise in yields then resumed, with borrowing costs remaining elevated.
The reversal of welfare reforms puts an almost £5bn black hole in Reeves' fiscal plans.
The rise, at least at first, was caused by the suggestion the chancellor might step down, suggests she retains market credibility.
But the fact borrowing costs remain higher, suggests wider concerns about the government's Budget maths are starting to materialise.
When asked why Reeves appeared upset, a Treasury spokesperson said it was a "personal matter" that had caused her distress.
The movements in the pound and gilt yields are "a sign of fiscal stress, which the UK has had to weather before," said Kathleen Brooks, research director at XTB.
The FTSE 250, which is more exposed to UK policies than the FTSE 100, closed down 1.34%.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No age limit on law, says Met Police chief as 83-year-old arrested at protest
The law does not have an age limit, the head of the Metropolitan Police said after an 83-year-old reverend was arrested when protesters gathered to show support for Palestine Action which has been banned as a terror group. The Metropolitan Police posted on X on Saturday afternoon saying officers were responding to the demonstration in Parliament Square, London, and later added that 29 people were arrested. The protest started at about 1.10pm and officers were seen taking people away shortly after 1.30pm. Reverend Sue Parfitt, 83, who was sat in a camp chair with placards at her feet, appeared to have been taken away by officers. A woman seen lying on the ground in handcuffs was lifted by officers and put in a police van. Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley was asked on the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg whether it was a good use of police time after the priest was pictured being taken away from the demonstration. He said: 'The law doesn't have an age limit, whether you're 18 or 80. 'If you're supporting proscribed organisations, then the law is going to be enforced. 'Officers, you could see, did it with great care and tried to preserve that person's dignity, but they're breaking a serious law. 'Palestine Action have over the last 18 months, I have to be careful what I say, because there's cases coming to trial, but some really serious criminal offences that they're accused of. There are millions of pounds worth of damage on multiple occasions. There are assaults, there are weapons used. 'It is not about protest. This is about an organisation committing serious criminality and obviously the Home Secretary was persuaded by the papers on her desk to proscribe them, that law has come into force, and if people want to defy that law, then we have to enforce it.' Palestine Action lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge on Friday which sought to stop the protest group being banned, less than two hours before the new legislation came into force at midnight. The designation as a terror group means that membership of, or support for, Palestine Action is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. A group had earlier said it was set to gather in Parliament Square on Saturday holding signs supporting Palestine Action, according to campaign group Defend Our Juries. In a letter to the Home Secretary, protesters said: 'We do not wish to go to prison or to be branded with a terrorism conviction, but we refuse to be cowed into silence by your order.' The move to ban the organisation was announced after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused around £7 million of damage. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. MPs in the Commons voted 385 to 26, majority 359, in favour of proscribing the group on Wednesday, before the House of Lords backed the move without a vote on Thursday. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident at RAF Brize Norton. They appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday after being charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage, under the Criminal Law Act 1977.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Another tantrum from the Labour backbenches is inevitable
In common with many parents across the country, here's a conversation that I have with my young daughter on a semi-regular basis (bear with me, this will take on some political relevance eventually). Me: "So it's 15 minutes until your bedtime, you can either have a little bit of TV or do a jigsaw, not both." Daughter: "Ummmm, I want to watch TV." Me: "That's fine, but it's bed after that, you can't do a jigsaw as well." Fast-forward 15 minutes. Me: "Right, TV off now please, bedtime." (Pause) Daughter: "I want to do a jigsaw." Now replace me with the government, the TV and jigsaw options with axing welfare cuts and scrapping the two-child cap, and my daughter with rebellious backbenchers. Politics latest: That is the tension currently present between Downing Street and Labour MPs. And my initial ultimatum is the messaging being pumped out from the government this weekend. In essence: you've had your welfare U-turn, so there's no money left for the two-child cap to go as well. As an aside - and before my inbox fills with angry emails lambasting me for using such a crude metaphor for policies that fundamentally alter the lives of some of the most vulnerable in society - yes, I hear you, and that's part of my point. For many in Labour, this approach feels like the lives of their constituents are being used in a childish game of horse-trading. So what can be done? Well, the government could change the rules. Altering the fiscal rules is - and will likely remain - an extremely unlikely solution. But as it happens, one of Labour's proverbial grandparents has just popped round with a different suggestion. A wealth tax, Lord Neil Kinnock says, is the necessary outcome of the economic restrictions the party has placed on itself. Ever the Labour storyteller, Lord Kinnock believes this would allow the government to craft a more compelling narrative about whose side this administration is on. That could be valuable, given one of the big gripes from many backbench critics is that they still don't really understand what this prime minister stands for - and by extension, what all these "difficult decisions" are in aid of. The downside is whether it will actually raise much money. The super-rich may have lots of assets to take a slice from, but they also have expensive lawyers ready to find novel ways to keep their client's cash away from the prying eyes of the state. Or, of course, they could just leave - as many are doing already. In the short term, the future is a bit easier to predict. If Downing Street is indeed now saying there is no money to scrap the two-child cap (after heavy briefing in the opposite direction just weeks ago), an almighty tantrum from the backbenches is inevitable. And as every parent knows, the more you give in, the harder it becomes to hold the line.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Wind turbines in our gardens? Miliband has finally lost the plot
Back when he was not able to eat bacon sandwiches very well and was stabbing his brother in the back, Ed Miliband did a useful job for the nation by being an amusing diversion. Then Labour got in and he was made Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, which meant that the 55-year-old was able to bring his frothy, zany and over-excitable self to a multi-billion-pound tiller; there's the £8.3 billion for the new state-owned GB Energy firm among various other squillions. And it means, when he's not banging the drum for the EV cars or heat pumps that no one wants or can afford, he squarks and – literally – sings (very badly) about wind power. His latest cunning plan being for people to erect wind turbines in their gardens. This is quite bold and brazen even for Miliband. Wind turbines are the vast steel, fiberglass, iron, copper, aluminium and concrete weapons of scenic destruction that have been popping up to fester in all their hideousness across our cherished isle. And many communities have managed to ward them off. Where I used to live in south Northamptonshire, for example, a scheme emerged for a flock of unseemly turbines to litter the horizon above the quaint village of nearby Helmdon, a place frequently wet but definitely not very windy. When the scheme was mooted, objecting seemed a fruitless task to most of us. But a few diligently went about doing their best and amazingly managed to defeat the plans. The landowner then went around sheepishly saying he'd never really wanted them anyway and everyone breathed a sigh of relief. Until the following week when HS2 was announced and we sold up and moved to near Exmoor, where more wind turbines were mooted. Fortunately, the Exmoor National Park Authority's passion for conservation means large-scale wind farms don't quite fit the bill. But eagle-eyed Miliband has a way around that. If he can't get massive farms built then he, rather aptly, will see his way to a scattering of more diminutive erections across the country. Which means in your field, or your garden. This week, he announced a consultation on relaxing planning rules that govern the construction of turbines on residential and commercial properties. And when someone like Miliband or Angela Rayner use the word 'relax', what that means is they will ignore, or ride roughshod over local objections. Which, for communities, is very far from relaxing. 'Every turbine we build helps protect families, businesses and the public finances from future fossil fuel shocks,' Miliband said this week, adding: 'As part of this, we will consult on how permitted development rights can support the rollout of small-scale onshore wind.' So the prospect is that while your local council will deny you planning for your cute new conservatory, roof terrace or garden room, what the Government will consent to is a vast wind turbine plonked where your neighbour used to grow cabbages. As Andrew Bowie, the shadow energy spokesman, said this week, Miliband is 'trying to turn the nation's suburbs into a giant wind farm'. And it is this kind of random, unfettered construction that ruins the look and feel of Britain. You can also be sure that these huge structures (whose low hum will keep you awake and whose blades, if they ever turn, will kill birds) will cost a pretty penny. It means that those who can afford them will make huge energy savings as they generate electricity for their own consumption while selling the excess to the National Grid. The issue would prove hugely divisive for communities. However, we can take heart in that Miliband's announcement comes in the same week that Health Secretary Wes Streeting said that Britain will be 'fat free' by 2035. It may not be the silly season yet but there's certainly a lot of scorchingly hot air. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
