No 10 says Starmer backs Reeves after Chancellor's tears in Commons
But allies said she was dealing with a 'personal matter' and No 10 said she had Sir Keir's 'full backing'.
Sir Keir, who stumbled on his way out of Downing Street for Prime Minister's Questions, faced questions over his handling of a welfare reform package which has been stripped of key elements to limit the scale of a Labour revolt.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said Ms Reeves looked 'absolutely miserable' and challenged the Prime Minister to say whether she would keep her job until the next election.
Sir Keir dodged the question about whether Ms Reeves would be in place for the remainder of the Parliament, saying Mrs Badenoch 'certainly won't'.
Changes to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) were abandoned on Tuesday just 90 minutes before MPs voted on them, wiping out the savings that Ms Reeves had counted on to help meet her goal of funding day-to-day spending through tax receipts rather than borrowing.
Mrs Badenoch said: 'Today the Prime Minister refused to back his Chancellor, leaving her humiliated.
'She is the human shield for his expensive U-turns. How can anyone be a chancellor for a man who doesn't know what he believes and who changes his mind every other minute?'
As the Chancellor left the Commons after Prime Minister's Questions her sister, Ellie Reeves, took her hand in an apparent show of support.
Asked about her tears, 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.'
Reports suggested Ms Reeves had been involved in an altercation with Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle shortly before Prime Minister's Questions.
A spokeswoman for the Speaker said: 'No comment.'
Asked why Sir Keir did not confirm in the Commons that he still had faith in Ms Reeves, the Prime Minister's press secretary told reporters: 'He has done so repeatedly.
Govt was planning to save ~£5bn in 2029-30 through welfare cuts – would have risen to ~£11bn in long run
Now, govt will save nothing this parliament
(2029-30 savings from cutting health element of UC (£1.7bn) roughly offsets cost of raising basic UC (£1.8bn))
— Helen Miller (@HelenMiller_IFS) July 2, 2025
'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.'
Asked whether the Prime Minister still had confidence in Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, the press secretary said: 'Yes.'
Labour has promised that income tax, employee national insurance contributions and VAT will not be increased, restricting Ms Reeves' options for raising money if she does look to hike taxes.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies' incoming director, Helen Miller, said: 'Since departmental spending plans are now effectively locked in, and the Government has already had to row back on planned cuts to pensioner benefits and working-age benefits, tax rises would look increasingly likely.
'This will doubtless intensify the speculation over the summer about which taxes may rise and by how much.'
Sir Keir declined to rule out tax rises later this year, telling MPs: 'No prime minister or chancellor ever stands at the despatch box and writes budgets in the future.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Graziadaily
5 minutes ago
- Graziadaily
Everything We Know About Rachel Reeves' Family
The chancellor Rachel Reeves made headlines this week after she broke down in tears during a heated exchange in Prime Minister's Questions (PMQ's) in the House of Commons. Throughout the session, conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said Reeves looked 'absolutely miserable' and described her as Prime Minister Keir Starmer's 'human shield.' In the fiery exchange, Starmer refused to say whether Reeves would remain in her job until the next election in front of MPs in the Commons, while Reeves appeared to wipe away tears behind him. After PMQs, Reeves' spokesperson said she had been dealing with a 'personal matter' and Starmer said her tears had had 'nothing to do with politics.' One person by Reeves side throughout the ordeal was her sister, Ellie Reeves, who is also a Labour minister. Ellie appeared to comfort Reeves by holding her hand as she left the Common's Chamber. Rachel Reeves' sister is Ellie Reeves, the MP for Lewisham West and East Dulwich. Ellie, who is two years younger than Rachel, was elected as MP of Lewisham West & Penge in 2017. Rachel and Ellie come from a public service background - their father was a teacher and their mother worked as a social worker. Ellie studied law at St Catherine's College Oxford, where she chaired the Oxford University Labor Club in 2001 and was National Chair of Labour Students from 2002 to 2003. The siblings always had a strong interest in politics. While at Cator Park School for Girls, in Beckenham, Rachel decided to run in a mock election, and Ellie was her campaign manager. In an interview with The Independent, Ellie outlined how the pair had always supported each other's careers, even as children. 'I can remember the 1992 general election, and we were at school, and they had a mock election,' she told the outlet. 'Rachel put herself forward for this mock election, and I was her campaign manager... She put me in charge of the leaflets, stickers and things like that to give out.' Rachel and Ellie elaborated on their relationship in a joint interview with The New Statesman. Ellie quipped that Rachel could be like 'a pushy parent' who encouraged her to do her homework on time, but maintained the siblings are strongly supportive of each other. 'Rachel's work ethic is something that I hugely admire, and her loyalty,' Ellie said. 'Her schedule is really demanding but she still makes time for her friends and family. She has always pushed me and supported me in whatever I have wanted to do.' Yes, Rachel Reeves is married to Nicholas Joicey, who has had a long career in the civil service after starting out as a journalist for the Observer newspaper. In July 2023, he was appointed Defra Group Chief Operating Officer and Second Permanent Secretary at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. He also worked as Gordon Brown's speechwriter when Brown was Chancellor. In an interview with The Guardian, Reeves was asked how she balances work and family life. 'We manage it. The reason we're where we are in south-east London is because we're near my parents, and we do get help,' she said. Yes, Rachel Reeves has two children, a son and a daughter. Reeves announced her first pregnancy in 2012, and gave birth to a daughter called Anna. Rachel and Nicholas welcomed their second child - a son called Harold born in 2015. In her general election campaign speech in May, Reeves remembered how her mother's attitude to finances inspired her own economic policies. She explained how her mother sat at the kitchen table 'combing over, line by line, her bank statements and her receipts.' She added: 'Every penny mattered... The basic test for whoever is chancellor is to bring that attitude to the public finances.'
Glasgow Times
6 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
MP likens Government to flat-earthers over refusal to compensate Waspi women
Labour's Rebecca Long Bailey said the arguments against compensation for the 1950s-born women are 'bizarre' and akin to those made by people who believe the Earth is flat. The Government last December ruled out a compensation package for women born in the 1950s, whose state pension age was raised so it would be equal with men. This is despite Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves being among the senior ministers to support the Waspi campaign when Labour was in opposition. A report by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) had recommended the UK Government pay compensation to women born in the 1950s whose state pension age was raised so it would be equal with men. The watchdog also said the women should be paid up to £2,950 each, a package with a potential total cost of £10.5 billion to the public purse, as poor communication meant they had lost out on the chance to plan their retirement finances. The Women Against State Pension Inequality (Waspi) group is currently seeking a judicial review to force the Government to reconsider its decision to rule out a compensation package. Work and pensions minister Torsten Bell, who is also a Treasury minister, said the Government does not agree with the Ombudsman's approach 'to injustice or to remedy'. Speaking in the Commons, Ms Long Bailey argued that 'cost does not need to be and should not be a barrier to justice', as she urged the Government to introduce a wealth tax to fund a compensation scheme. The MP for Salford said: 'I don't want (Mr Bell) to go down in history as the man who denied justice for the 1950s women, I honestly don't. I want to see action on this, and I want him to go down as the person who finally, finally managed to award them justice. 'But at the moment, he's got to understand that the arguments being put forward by the Government are absurd, to say the least. In fact, they're akin to somebody arguing that the world is flat, in denying the Ombudsman's report.' Waspi campaigners outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London (Haixin Tan/PA) Earlier in her contribution, the former Labour leadership candidate, who had called the debate, disputed the Government's assertion that the women knew the change was coming. She said: 'Whilst the Government agreed with the finding of maladministration and apologised, no redress would be forthcoming. 'And contrary to the Ombudsman, they actually felt that the majority of women did know about changes to their pension age, based on Department for Work and Pensions research, and that sending the women letters would not have been effective, which I'm sure most people would agree is bizarre. 'It's pretty effective when a bill addressed to you coming through your door comes through, it's pretty effective when it's a hospital appointment, it's pretty effective on the very rare but joyous occasion that HMRC gives you a tax rebate cheque. 'So, I ask, honestly, would 1950s-born women have actively refused to open letters with their name on from the DWP? It makes no sense.' Ms Long Bailey went on to say: 'In terms of options to make sure that schemes could be financially sustainable, Waspi have calculated that HM Treasury have saved a whopping £181 billion alone by increasing the state pension age. 'Well, there's other options, there's the option of applying a 1% to 2% wealth tax on assets over £10 million, raising up to £22 billion a year. Equalise capital gains tax with income tax rates, raising £15.2 billion a year. Apply national insurance to investment income, raising £8.6 billion a year. 'End stealth subsidies on banks, and you get up to £55 billion over the next five years, and even Gordon Brown has advocated for this. So cost does not need to be, and should not be, a barrier to justice.' During the debate, Independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, John McDonnell joked that the Government would soon be proscribing the Waspi group. On Wednesday, MPs supported legislation to proscribe the Palestine Action group as a terrorist organisation. Mr McDonnell said: 'I pay tribute to the campaign. A lot of those ladies have been patronised over the years, it was a terrific campaign. In fact, it was so terrific under this Government at the moment, they would probably be proscribed.' Responding to the debate, Mr Bell said: 'We agree that letters should have been sent sooner. We have apologised, and we will learn the lessons from that. 'However, as honourable members and campaigners on this issue are well aware, we do not agree with the Ombudsman's approach to injustice or to remedy.' He added: 'An important consideration when making this decision was that evidence showed that sending people unsolicited letters is unlikely (to) affect what they knew, which is why letters are sent, but they are sent as part of wider communication campaigns. 'This evidence was not properly considered by the Ombudsman. 'Another consideration was that the great majority of 1950s-born women were aware that the state pension age was changing, if not their specific state pension age.'
Spectator
11 minutes ago
- Spectator
So much is still unanswered about NHS reform
Given we have known for a good while that Labour thinks the way to save the health service is to move care out of hospitals and into the community, you might have expected today's NHS ten-year plan to explain how the government is going to do that. The preventive agenda is not a new idea that needs explaining, it's been around for the entire 77-year history of the health service. The problem, therefore, is not the lack of an idea, it's that reform never actually happens. The important and urgent priorities of waiting lists and emergency units always end up dominating, and the neighbourhood health centres, walk-in clinics, polyclinics or the 'health centres' set out in Labour's original plan for the NHS under Nye Bevan, end up coming a distant second, if at all. We do not know how neighbourhood health centres are going to work with GPs, for instance, or how they will be incentivised to move into the centres. GPs are famously resistant to change, whether structural or more physical: Alan Johnson told me that the only way he could get them to move into modern premises was to threaten them with a polyclinic being built in their area, and then they would suddenly up sticks and modernise. It turns out that we are to be kept waiting a while longer for the details of how ministers expect the NHS to achieve the big changes set out today. The document we should apparently have all been excited about was the NHS Planning Guidance, which is being published earlier than usual this year in order to make implementation faster. A delivery plan in today's document would have, apparently, just been for show rather than anything more meaningful. There are serious changes in the operating models for NHS trusts, including incentives for high-performing providers. They will be able to reinvest surpluses, and given more control over a health budget for their local population which they must commit to shifting from hospital to community. Patients are to be given more power, and more than 200 bodies or entities are being scrapped. The rationale behind Healthwatch, for instance, being scrapped, is that listening to patients should be 'core business' rather than a niche enterprise. And the rationale behind abolishing so many parts of the NHS structure – including, of course, the end of NHS England as a separate organisation – is that the system is too centralised. The plan was much delayed: it was originally supposed to be published 'in the spring'. For once, it was not rows about funding that held it up: though both Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves repeatedly asserted that there would be 'no more money without reform', they also repeatedly announced more money without reform. Now, we have money and reform, but not enough evidence that the latter can actually happen, or that the former will make its way to the right places.
